Contents

Chapter V The sound doctrine on charity and on the Law of charity; some errors that emerge in this regard through Amoris Laetitia.

Preliminary note: the official text is only the one in Italian, the various versions in other languages ​​are neural automatic translations.

Introduction

We ask God for light so that his wisdom guide us in everything we do:

"God of the fathers and Lord of mercy, whom you created everything with your word, who formed man with your wisdom, so that you may dominate over the creatures you have made, and govern the world with holiness and justice and pronounce judgments with upright mind,
give me wisdom, who sits enthroned next to you and do not exclude me from the number of your children, because I am your servant and the son of your handmaid, a weak and short-lived man, unable to understand justice and laws. Even the most perfect of men, without your wisdom, would be esteemed a nothing. With you is the wisdom that knows your works, which was present when you created the world; it knows what is pleasing to your eyes and what is in accordance with your decrees. Send her from the holy heavens, from your glorious throne, to assist me and support me in my toil and to know what pleases you. She knows everything and understands everything: she will guide me with prudence in my actions and will protect me with her glory. " (Wis 9, 1-6. 9-11)

The letter of the Argentine Bishops and the Amoris Laetitia speak several times of charity but, as we will see, this treatment of this fundamental virtue and of various topics connected to it leaves much to be desired and opens the doors to various errors…. therefore it seems to me important to first specify with sufficient depth some aspects of charity according to sound Catholic doctrine and then to examine what the letter of the Argentine Bishops and Amoris Laetitia affirms, in this way the problematic aspects and errors of these texts will emerge clearly. .

I remind everyone that the Pope said that Amoris Laetitia is a Thomist: “On this I want to clearly reiterate that the morality of Amoris Laetitia is Thomistic, that of the great Thomas. "[1] ... and we will see, unfortunately, in our discussion what s. Thomas and how Amoris Laetitia makes statements that diverge in a clear way from the statements of St. Thomas on the theme of charity and on topics related to it.

1) Fundamental indications about charity in Holy Scripture.

Examining the Bible in depth with the guidance of Tradition means discovering that God is charity as St. John ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἀγάπη ἐστίν (1 Jn. 4,8), means discovering that in the Trinity there is Charity, the Father loves the Son (Jn. 3,35; 5,20), and the Son loves the Father (Jn. 14,31); on the other hand God pours charity into our hearts through the Holy Spirit (Rom 5,5: 5), the fruit of the Holy Spirit is love, charity (Gal. XNUMX) and s. Paul affirms: "Therefore, brothers, for our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of the Spirit, I recommend you ...". In the light of biblical teaching and in the line of Tradition we must even affirm that the Holy Spirit is Person - Love, as John Paul II explains: "In his intimate life God" is love ", essential love, common to the three divine Persons: love personal is the Holy Spirit, as Spirit of the Father and of the Son. For this, he "searches the depths of God", as an uncreated love-gift. It can be said that in the Holy Spirit the intimate life of the Triune God is made entirely of a gift, an exchange of mutual love between the divine Persons, and that through the Holy Spirit God "exists" as a gift. The Holy Spirit is the personal expression of such a self-giving, of this being-love. He is Person-love. He is Person-gift. … As the Apostle Paul writes: "God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us". "[2] .

Examining the Bible in depth with the guidance of Tradition means, indeed, first of all realizing that God infinitely exceeds everything we can say or understand about Him and that, therefore, God is infinitely super love and infinitely super loves himself; in fact the Catechism says that divine reality is: "... infinitely above all that we can understand or say". (Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church No. 206)

Examining the Bible in depth with the guidance of Tradition means discovering that the true God, that is the Trinity, infinitely loves men, the Gospel of John is very clear: "God in fact loved the world so much that he gave the only Son, because whoever believes In him he does not go lost, but he has eternal life "(GV. 3,16), in the letter of John read:" ἐν τούτῳ ἐἐααεεώώη ἡἡἐἐη ῖῖ θεεῦὸ ἡμῖν, ὅτι ὸὸν ἱὸἡν αὐτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ ἀπέσταλκεν ὁ θὸΣ ἰἰΣ ὸὸν κόσμον ἵνα ζήσωμεν δι 'αὐτοῦ. "(1 Jn. 4,9)" In this the love of God was manifested in us: God sent his only-begotten Son into the world, so that we might have life through him. " St. Paul affirms: "He, who did not spare his own Son, but handed him over for us all, will he not give us everything together with him?" (Rom. 8,32)

On the other hand, God is infinitely super Father of all (Eph. 4,6), he calls us to participate in his life (II Pt. 1,4; 1 Jn. 4,7-8) and to his love, that is to charity (Rom. 5,5) and has given us a Spirit of charity (2Tim. 1,7); in this line, as the great Doctors teach, we are called to divinization[3] this divinization is accomplished in charity.

In Christ the charity of God is manifested supremely and we are invited by him to imitate him in charity (Jn 13,34, Ap. 1,5; Eph. 5; I Pt. 2,21s)

God has chosen us in Christ: "... before the creation of the world to be holy and immaculate before him in love, predestining us to be adopted children for him through Jesus Christ, according to the loving plan of his will" ( Eph. 1,4)

For what has been said so far in this paragraph, cf. C. Spicq "Theologie morale du Noveau Testament." Librairie Lecoffre J. Gabalda et. Cie., Paris, 1970 tome II p. 481-493

The Christian life is a response of charity to divine charity for us (Rom. 12,9: 12s). Charity makes us love God with all of ourselves (Mk 29, 13,8f). Charity makes the Law and the commandments fully observed (Rm. 14; Jn. 21.23, 15,10.14; 1; 2,5 Jn. 5,2; 2s; 6 Jn. XNUMX).

In Christ man is restored to the original perfection of charity, which was lost due to original sin.

a) Clarifications about charity in the OT

It is the prophet Hosea, according to Kaufmann Kohler, in the Jewish Encyclopedia, the one who gives love a deeper and purer meaning, in the OT, discovering that God loves Israel despite his deviations (Hos. 11), is a love of free will (Hos. 1).

On love, Deuteronomy builds its entire system; God loved the fathers (Deut.10), and because He transferred this love to their descendants, the whole people of Israel, He chose them, though not on their merit, to be His peculiar nation and protected them against theirs. enemies (Deut 15, 7-6; 8, 23). God therefore requires that his people love him as a response to his love (Deut 6, 6; 5, 10; 12, 11, 1, 13; 22, 13; 4, 19; 9, 30, 6, 16); God also loves the stranger and wants the members of his people to have love for the stranger (Dt 20, 10-18).

God's love for Israel is declared by Jeremiah as "an everlasting love" (Jer. 31. 3), and both Isaiah and the last of the prophets accentuate this love of God (Is. 63, 9; Ml. 1, 2).[4]

More precisely, through Hosea, a prophet of the eighth century BC, God presents his relationship with Israel as that of a faithful husband who, despite the betrayal made by the bride, undertakes to regain possession of her love (cf. Hos. 2, 16-25); through Hosea God shows his passionate love but also strong enough to overcome the sin of the bride and lead her back to the purest love, so although the bride has betrayed him with sin, with infidelity, God continues to love her as a husband in love . Likewise in Isaiah (Is 54,5-8) and in Ezekiel (2, 2; 16, 6.8.15) this nuptial dimension of God's love for his people emerges. [5]

God presents Israel as a "people of God" (Ex. 3, 7.8) and as a "son of God" (Ex. 4,23) whom he himself frees from Egypt and more directly, in a certain way, generates ...

In Deuteronomy we read: “So you repay the Lord, a people foolish and lacking in wisdom?
Isn't he the father who created you, who made you and established you? " (Deut. 32, 6s)

It should be noted that the idea of ​​the People of God has an ethnic dimension and a religious dimension, this idea also involves "... three particular characteristics, which are the call, the belonging, the journey."[6]

God called Israel to be his People, he chose it freely, it belongs to him and must be guided by him, God guides Israel on a path that Israel must travel, as can be seen very clearly in the Exodus.

The call emerges clearly from this passage from Deuteronomy: "The Lord has bound himself to you and has chosen you, not because you are more numerous than all other peoples - you are in fact the least of all peoples - but because the Lord he loves and because he wanted to keep the oath he swore to your fathers: the Lord brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you by freeing you from the servile condition, from the hand of Pharaoh, king of Egypt. " (Deuteronomy 7, 7-8)

Membership also emerges from this text of Deuteronomy: “You are children to the Lord, your God: you will not make incisions and you will not shave between the eyes for a dead man. You are in fact a people consecrated to the Lord, your God, and the Lord has chosen you to be his particular people among all the peoples who are on earth. "(Deut. 14,1: XNUMXs)

The journey of the People of God is clearly seen in the Exodus but continues throughout Scripture, becoming the journey of the New People of God, the Church, is a journey in this world and a journey towards Heaven.

The People of God is the recipient and counterpart of a Covenant with God, which must be understood as: "... personal disposition, commitment, obligation, assurance, promise, which basically originates from a free and unilateral initiative of God, to which it is eventually connected even an oath ".[7]

The covenant is essentially characterized by a grace (the Lord commits himself), that is, by the gift that God makes of himself and by the Law, that is, by the gift that God makes to man of an ethical-cultual path that allows man to enter and to remain in covenant with God himself.[8]

In the Bible we have various covenants, the one with Noah, the one with Abraham, the one with Moses, etc.

We read in the Catechism of the Catholic Church that the Covenant with Noah, of which the first chapters of Genesis speak: "expresses the ... principle of the divine economy towards the" nations "" (Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 56)

It is practically a cosmic alliance proportional to the state of perversity and the punishment that preceded it and indicates the new contact established between God and saved humanity.[9]

Except in the case of Noah, the concept of covenant "... has a characteristic relationship with the history of Israel, with its past and with its future."[10]

The covenant with Abraham implies: 1) the promise of the land (Gn 15,18; 17,8; 28,15) and of a descendant (cf. Gn 17,15-19; 26,24; 28,14). 2) responsibility for the clan and for the nations (Gn 18,18:3) 18,19) a law, in fact God has chosen him "... so that he obliges his children and his family after him to observe the way of the Lord and to act with justice and law "(Gn XNUMX:XNUMX)[11]

We arrive at the Mount Sinai Covenant: “The founding experience of the covenant occurs at Sinai. It is presented in a founding historical event. It is completely a gift of God, the fruit of his total initiative, and it commits both God (Grace) and men (the Law). It confers on newborn Israel the status of a people with full rights. "[12]

Penna adds that the Sinai covenant "... concerns the establishment of the only people of Israel as the people of God, focusing on the essential datum of the Torah which denotes the divine will towards it (it can be summarized in the" ten words "( Deut 4,13; 5,2,22; placed in the ark, they make it "the ark of the" covenant or even in the first commandment not to worship another God (Deut 17,2; 29,24-25) . ...) "[13]

Other covenants were made with David and his descendants (2Sam 23,5; Ps 89,4.29.35.40; Is 55,3; Jer 33.21) with Levi / Aaron (Mal 2,4-5.8; Jer 33,21b)[14]

The covenant between God and his people implies that the people, as mentioned, observe the Law and therefore love God, as the Law commands. In particular, it is necessary to cite the famous texts, especially from Deuteronomy which present love as commanded by God (Deut. 6,5; 10,12; 11,13.22; 19,9; 30,20; Jos. 23,11) as necessary to please God (Dt. 10,12; 11,13.22; 19,9; 30,20; Josh. 23,11) as the end of a series of tests allowed by God (Dt. 13,4) and as a gift of God (Dt. 30,6)

If God, as we have seen, is presented as the Bridegroom of the people of God, it is obvious that the bride, that is precisely the people, must love God; this love is united with the observance of the covenant with God and therefore of the Law that He gives (Sir. 2, 15-17), the Law itself commands the love of God, as seen, and God gives this love to man (Dt. 30,6).

The following passage in Deteronomy 6 is particularly significant in regards to what we are saying: “Listen, Israel: the Lord is our God, one is the Lord. You will love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your strength. These precepts that I am giving you today, are fixed in your heart. You will repeat them to your children, you will talk about them when you are in your house, when you walk on the street, when you go to bed and when you get up. You will tie them to your hand as a sign, they will be like a pendant between your eyes and you will write them on the doorposts of your house and on your doors. "

God commands man to love Him and this love implies the observance of the Law; man must love God with all of himself: with all his heart, mind, etc. this precisely implies observance of what God wills, observance of the Law given by God out of love.

The divine law is not simply observed but must be loved, as a gift of love from God for the true good of man (Ps. 119)

Israel is presented as an adulterous wife precisely because she does not accept the gift of God and does not love him as she should and fails to observe the Law even giving herself to the worship of other gods.

The command of love for God must be associated with the command of love for neighbor.

In Leviticus we read: “You will not take revenge and hold no grudge against the sons of your people, but you will love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord. "(Lev. 19,18:XNUMX)

It should be noted that by neighbor we do not mean every man, rather we mean the member of the people of God, fellow countryman and co-religionist, and the foreigner domiciled among the chosen people (gher) and the multiple expression of command is left to the responsibility and sensitivity of the 'individual (see A. Penna "Love in the Bible." ed. Paideia Brescia 1972 p. 133).

The famous exegete Spadafora explains: "In the OT, in fact, the next ... are the Israelites, people of the same race, or in any case how many, and exclusively they, entered with circumcision or equivalent rite to be part of the community, according to solidarity principle, then in force. Thus we sometimes find included, in the precept of love of neighbor, the ghér or stranger (Lev. 19, 34; Deut. 10, 19); he lives in the midst of Israel and has accepted the heavy burden of the Law. But all the others are excluded. In this sense, the rabbinic literature comments in agreement on the laws concerning the neighbor; always specifying that it is only the Israelite and "not the Samaritan, the foreigner or the proselyte" (Mekiltà, Ex. 21, 14.35). " (F. Spadafora "Charity" in "Biblical Dictionary" ed. Studium, Rome, 1963)

So in the OT, the next to love is the Israelites, not the others! Everyone else is excluded from this love.

With the Gospel, love of neighbor has become something new (F. Spadafora "Charity" in "Biblical Dictionary" ed. Studium 1963).

Through the New Testament, as seen above and as we shall see better, God has perfected what the OT contained by manifesting in the fullest way both charity in the intimate life of God, both charity in God's relationship with men, and charity that must animate our relationship with God, both the charity we must have towards ourselves, and the charity we must have towards our neighbor.

b) The terms that Scripture uses to indicate charity.

As Romano Penna explains, the fundamental Hebrew term for expressing love is' a · hă · ḇāh (from the verb aheb "to love") and indicates "" the intense desire to be close, not only internally but also physically, to the person with to which one feels attracted and united, and to be closely and strongly linked to it in all aspects of life "".[15]

More precisely, the verb aheb means to love both in an honest way (cf. Deut. 6,5; 5,10; Ps. 31,24 etc.) and in a dishonest way (cf. Jer. 2,25; 20,4; Ez . 16,37); this verb indicates a love (good or evil) towards God or towards a human or other creature (food, temple, etc.) (cf. A. Penna "Love in the Bible" ed. Paideia, Brescia 1972 p. 9s)

The term ahebah ('a · hă · ḇāh) indicates honest love.[16]

The concept of merciful love, especially of God, is expressed by various Hebrew words that we will see below.

1) Hesed “indicates original and constitutive goodness, love that springs up, pure and gratuitous”.[17]

2) In the “Dives in Misericordia” we read that the second word that in the terminology of the Old Testament serves to define mercy is rahamim. … Rahamim, in its very root, denotes the love of a mother (rehem = womb). From the deep and original bond that binds a mother to her child, a particular relationship with the child arises, a particular love. We can say of this love that it is completely free, undeserved, and that in this respect it constitutes an interior necessity: a need of the heart.[18]; hesed and rahamim are the main terms for divine mercy.

More generally we can say that in Scripture the root rhm is used to indicate the effect of love and in particular mercy; this root is found in the verb raham, used almost exclusively to indicate divine mercy and love (Ps. 18,2; 103,13; Is. 49,10; 54,8; Hos. I, 6s), and in the noun rehem, with the plural we mentioned above (cf. A. Penna “Love in the Bible.” Ed. Paideia Brescia 1972 p. 12).

3) Again in the “Dives in Misericordia” we read that the term hanan expresses a broader concept: it actually means manifestation of grace, which involves, so to speak, a constant predisposition to be generous, benevolent and merciful.[19]

4) In addition to these basic semantic elements, the Old Testament concept of mercy also consists of what is included in the verb hamal, which literally means "to spare" a defeated enemy, that is to avoid killing him but also "to show mercy and compassion ”, and consequently it means forgiveness and remission of guilt. There is also the term hus, which expresses pity and compassion, but above all in an affective sense. These terms appear more rarely in biblical texts to denote mercy. Furthermore, it should be noted the word 'emet which means first of all "solidity, security" (in the Greek of the Seventy: "truth") and then "fidelity", earth in this way seems to be linked to the semantic content of the term hesed. "[20]

For other terms that indicate love in the TA, one can usefully consult the text by A. Penna “Love in the Bible” Paideia, Brescia 1972 pp. 10-15.

The Greek translators of the Old Testament precisely to render the Hebrew terms indicating love into the Greek language used the verb philein filein many times but above all they used the verb agapan agapan, to indicate the merciful dimension of love and therefore to translate in particular hesed and raham but also hanan used in particular the verbs ἐλεέin eleein and οἰκτeίρein oikteirein (see A. Penna “Love in the Bible” Paideia, Brescia 1972 p. 20).

In the line of the LXX the Greek terms that in the New Testament most directly indicate charity are in particular: the noun agape agaph with the relative verb agapaw with its derivatives and the verb phileo filew with its derivatives[21] With agapao, among the profane authors is indicated the free and spontaneous love that arises for the good esteem that one brings to a person; it implies a certain what veneration of the person[22]. And precisely charity is expressed first of all with this verb and with the terms connected to it, therefore in the first letter of John we read ὁ θεὸς ἀγάπη ἐστίν (1 Jn. 4,8) God is charity. In the wake of what we said above we must affirm that God is infinitely super charity.

In the first letter of s. John we also read: Ἀγαπητοί, ἀγαπῶμεν ἀλλήλους, ὅτι ἡ ἀγάπη ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστιν, καὶ πᾶς ὁ ἀγαπῶεν ἐλλήλανα γντοῦ ετανα γγντοῦ γετνα γντανα γγντανα γντανα γγντανα γντανα γετανα γνανα ετανα γνα ετανα ετανα γνανα ετανα ετανα γετανα ετανα γετα γνα ετανα ὁ μὴ ἀγαπῶν οὐκ ἔγνω τὸν θεόν, ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἀγάπη ἐστίν. (1 Jn. 4, 7-8) Which we can translate as: my beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God; and whoever loves is generated by God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is Love (1 Jn. 4, 7-8)

And in the Gospel Jesus says: Αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐντολὴ ἡ ἐμὴ ἵνα ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλήλους καθὼς ἠγάπησα ὑμᾶς. (Jn 15,12:XNUMX) This is my commandment: love one another as I have loved you.

The verb agapao was evidently considered very valid to indicate God's love for us and its realization in us so that for it we love God and we love each other.[23].

The Greek verb phileo among the profane authors means: to hold something with affective love born spontaneously in one's soul, for which a certain person is perceived as welcome[24]

In the New Testament the verb phileo indicates a higher charity, in a certain sense, that is, a special charity that is directed towards some in a special way within the group of those who are loved through the more general charity. Thus, God (Father) loves, with love indicated by the verb phileo, the Son (Jn 5,20:16,27); the Father loves the disciples of Christ with this love indicated by the verb phileo (Jn 11:3.36); Jesus loves his friends with this special love (Jn 20,2, XNUMX; XNUMX)[25]

To indicate the merciful dimension of love and therefore to indicate what is rendered in Hebrew with hesed and raham, the New Testament hagiographers used in particular the verbs ἐλεέin eleein and οἰκτeίρein oikteirein with their derivatives but also the verb σπλαγχνίζω [26].

The verb ἐλεέin indicates not so much a compassionate soul as rather the mercy manifested in the works (cf. F. Zorell "Lexicon Graecum Novi Testamenti", Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome 1990, col. 413) instead οἰκτeίρein indicates the compassionate soul for which a person has mercy.[27]

The verb σπλαγχνίζω translates directly the Hebrew verb raham, in fact as rehem is the womb so σπλάγχνα splankna are the bowels and sometimes also the maternal uterus, and as raham indicates a deep maternal mercy, visceral the verb σπλαγχνίζω indicates this same mercy maternal, visceral [28]

The Vulgate generally renders the verb ἀγαπᾶν with diligere and ϕιλεῖν with love, since between the Latin words and the corresponding Greek words there is practically the same shade of meaning. As for the noun ἀγάπη, one would expect to always see it translated as dilectio, since ἀγαπᾶν is translated as diligere; instead it is caritas that most often translates that noun (90 times against 24). [29]

Caritas derives from carus, which means dear, both in the literal sense and therefore we say that a person is dear to us, in the sense that we love him, and in a figurative sense and therefore we say that certain goods are expensive, that is expensive. Caritas is distinguished from love, when one speaks of the gods, Cicero says in fact, or of the parents, of the fatherland, of eminent men, we prefer to use the word caritas; in the case of spouses, children, brothers and relatives, amor is used (cf. Partitiones orat. 88). The distinction was not rigorous; but in general, except among comic writers, caritas had a more noble meaning and would not have meant sensual or deranged love.

The Vulgate translates ἀγάπη sometimes with caritas, sometimes with dilectio, the two Latin words have absolutely the same value.[30] 

2) Charity is supremely in God; God is Charity.

As s. John Ὁ θεὸς ἀγάπη ἐστίν. (1 Jn 4,16:XNUMX) God is charity. Indeed, in the wake of what we said above, God is infinitely super charity.

In the first letter of s. John we also read: Ἀγαπητοί, ἀγαπῶμεν ἀλλήλους, ὅτι ἡ ἀγάπη ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστιν, καὶ πᾶς ὁ ἀγαπῶεν ἐλλήλανα γντοῦ ετανα γγντοῦ γετνα γντανα γγντανα γντανα γγντανα γντανα γετανα γνανα ετανα γνα ετανα ετανα γνανα ετανα ετανα γετανα ετανα γετα γνα ετανα 8ὁ μὴ ἀγαπῶν οὐκ ἔγνω τὸν θεόν, ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἀγάπη ἐστίν. (1 Jn. 4, 7-8) Which we can translate as: my beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God; and whoever loves is generated by God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is Love (1 Jn 4, 7-8). Charity comes from God and makes us children of God and shares in divine life. Without it we do not truly, in a certain way experimentally, know God, because God is Love. God is essentially infinitely super Love, he is all infinitely super lovable and he is all infinitely super loving. Inasmuch as God is a lover, that is, he loves infinitely, St John affirms: “In this the love of God is manifested in us: God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might have life through him. In this lies love: it was not we who loved God, but it was he who loved us and sent his Son as a victim of atonement for our sins. Beloved, if God loved us like this, we too must love one another. "(1 Jn 4, 9-11)

Adds s. John that we have known the love that God has for us and we have believed in the love that God has for us. God is charity; whoever remains in love remains in God and God remains in him. (cf. 1 Jn 4:16)

God made us be born into his life through living faith (1 Jn 5,1); this spiritual birth is the triumph of living faith, that is, united with charity (1 Jn 5, 4-5) We have believed in the charity that God manifests by sending his only-begotten Son to redeem us; in the light of God through charity we have understood that God is all loving and therefore all lovable.[31]

Already the Old Testament speaks of God's love highlighting his goodness and mercy but it is in the New Testament that, by sending his only Son and the Spirit of Love, the Trinity reveals itself more fully (cf. 1 Cor 7- 16; Eph 3,9: 12-1) and in this revelation he shows us that he is infinitely super Love (4,8.16 Jn XNUMX: XNUMX).

Charity is first of all in God, explains St. Thomas in the line of the Bible, and our charity is participation in divine charity: “Ad primum ergo dicendum quod ipsa essentia divina caritas est, sicut et sapientia est, et sicut bonitas est. Unde sicut dicimur boni bonitate quae Deus est, et sapientes sapientia quae Deus est, quia bonitas qua formaliter boni sumus est participatio quaedam divinae bonitatis, et sapientia qua formaliter sapientes sumus est participatio quaedam divinae sapientiae; ita etiam caritas qua formaliter diligimus proximum est quaedam participatio divinae caritatis. "(IIª-IIae q. 23 a. 2 ad 1) The divine essence is charity as it is wisdom and goodness etc. . As we are wise and good by sharing in divine wisdom and goodness, so the charity for which we love God and neighbor is a participation in the charity which is in God and which is God, God is charity. Our charity is therefore a certain participation in divine charity. The term love, charity, speaking of God, can be taken essentially or notionally, that is, it can refer to the essence or to the divine persons (cf. I q. 37 a. 2).

As a term referring to Essence, charity is a divine virtue. In God we find the perfection of virtues (cf. St. Thomas Aquinas "Sum against the Gentiles", and UTET, 2013, ebook, ,l.1 c. ninety two.). Like all other divine attributes, the virtues of God are the very Essence of him.[32] Virtue can be attributed to God within certain limits, first of all it must be attributed to him as perfection and not as habit, in fact there are no clothes in God because clothes indicate potential, God is Pure Act that has nothing of potential; then not all the virtues can be attributed to God but only those suitable to Him[33]. The divine virtues are exemplary virtues, exemplary causes of our virtues (cf. I-II, q. 61 a. 5 in c.) And above all the highest virtue, which is precisely charity, must be attributed to God. Love-Charity in God, like any other attribute of God, is the same divine Essence and is infinite. God loves himself and other beings. Infinite Love has as its object above all divine Goodness and, in relation to it, creatures; love in God is not a passion but an act of the will and God first of all wants himself, his goodness and wants creatures in order to himself. With regard to the love of God in relation to creatures, the answer given by s is interesting. Thomas when he asks himself if God loves everything equally and if God loves the best things more; says the s. Doctor that to love means to want the good for someone and for a double reason something can be loved more or less:

1) by part of the lover's act of will itself which is more or less intense and in this sense God does not love something more than another because he loves everything with a single very simple act of will

2) for part of the good that the lover wants for the beloved, and so it is said that we love one more than another because we want a greater good for him; in this sense it must be affirmed that God loves some realities more than others: in fact, since God's love is the cause of the goodness of creatures, there would be no creature better than the others if God did not want a greater good for it than for a other (cf. I q. 20 a. 3 in c.). Therefore, further, it must be said that God loves the best realities more because to love more means to want a greater good and God is the cause of goodness in creatures, therefore if some creatures are better they are because God wants a greater good for them therefore he loves them more (cf. I q. 20 a. 4 in c.). And adds s. Thomas that the affirmation according to which God takes care of all things equally is not to be understood in the sense that He distributes equal goods to all creatures but in the sense that with equal wisdom and goodness He administers all things (cf. I q. 20 a. 3 to 1). Holy Scripture clearly states "God is love" (1 Jn 4,16:4); God's love is precisely divine Charity (cf. In div. nom., ch. 11 l. XNUMX). St. Thomas further specifies with regard to divine love that “… in God love is not only true, but it is also most perfect and most stable. ... "[34]

Taken notionally and referring to a person, love is a proper name of the Holy Spirit: as a Word it is a proper name of the Son (cf. I q. 37 a. 1). St. Augustine in De Trinitate (6, 5,7) affirms: “… the Holy Spirit subsists together in this same unity and equality of substance. Indeed, whether he is the unity of the two other Persons, or their holiness, or their love, or their unity because it is their love, and both their love because it is their holiness, it is clear that it is not one of the two first Persons ... The Holy Spirit is therefore something common to the Father and the Son, whatever it is, or more precisely the same consubstantial and eternal communion; if the name of friendship suits you, call it that, but it is more accurate to call it charity. And this charity too is substance, because God is substance and God is charity, according to Scripture. ... Consequently there are no more than three: one who loves the one who originates from him, one who loves the one from whom he originates, and love itself. "[35]

Adds s. Augustine: “The Holy Spirit is therefore the God of love. … It is therefore the Spirit who is designated in this affirmation: God is love. This is why the Holy Spirit, God who proceeds from God, once given to man, kindles him with love for God and for his neighbor, being himself love. "[36] St. Thomas explains that if we take Love as a notional term, then to love means nothing more than to expire love: that is to say, it means to produce the verb, and to flourish means to produce flowers. As therefore it is said that the tree is flourishing for the flowers, so it is affirmed that the Father is saying (that is, he says) to the Word himself and us, and that the Father and the Son are lovers (that is, they love themselves and us. ) for the Holy Spirit, that is, for the proceeding Love (cf. I q. 37 a. 2).

In the "Sum against the Gentiles" s. Thomas adds in this line: “… it is necessary that the love with which God is in the divine will, as loved in the lover, proceeds both from the Word of God and from God of whom he is the Word. ... And since the beloved is present in the will as if to push and interiorly incline the lover towards the loved thing, since the interior impulse of living beings belongs to the vital spirits, it is right that God who proceeds as love is called Spirit , as it exists almost for a certain spirit. "[37]

In the famous encyclical "Divinum illud Munus" [38] Leo XIII, in the footsteps of s. Agostino and s. Thomas speaks in many passages of the Holy Spirit as Love. First of all he indicates the Holy Spirit as life-giving Love (n.2), then he specifies that the Holy Spirit is the Divine Goodness and Mutual Charity of the Father and the Son, to him the work of completing and perfecting creation is attributed, in fact the Holy Spirit is the ultimate cause of all things, and just as the will and all other things finally rest in their end, so he, who is precisely the Divine Goodness and Mutual Charity of the Father and the Son and the ultimate cause of all. things, completes and perfects things (n. 4) He adds that the Holy Spirit fills our hearts with the sweetness of fatherly love (cf. Rom. 8, 15-16) and that this truth agrees with the simile observed by the Angelic Doctor between the two operations of the Holy Spirit in fact through the work of this Spirit Christ was conceived in holiness to be the Son of God by nature, and others are sanctified to be the children of God by adoption (cf. III, q. 32, a. THE). This spiritual generation proceeds from Love, which is precisely the Holy Spirit, in a much nobler way than natural. (No. 8)

The Holy Spirit, therefore, divinizes us by generating us to divine life and making us true children of God, he fills our hearts with the sweetness of fatherly love and he also filled Christ conceived precisely through the work of the Holy Spirit with this love.

The Holy Spirit himself is the first and supreme Charity and moves souls, explains Leo XIII, and leads them to holiness, which consists in the love of God, that is, in charity; the fullness of divine gifts is in many ways a consequence of the presence of the Holy Spirit in the souls of the righteous; in fact, as St. Thomas teaches: “Quum Spiritus Sanctus procedat ut amor, procedit in ratione doni primo; unde dicit Augustinus, quod per donum quod est Spiritus Sanctus, fine propria dona dividuntur membris Christi ”(I, q. 38, a. 2) when the Holy Spirit proceeds as love, he proceeds as the first gift; so, as s. Augustine, through the Gift which is the Holy Spirit, many other special gifts are distributed among the members of Christ.[39]

Again Leo XIII specifies that the Divine Spirit, proceeding from the Father and the Word in the eternal light of holiness, being Himself Love and Gift, after having manifested himself through the veils of the figures in the Old Testament, poured out all his fullness on Christ and on his mystical Body, the Church; and he converted great sinners so powerfully as to cause them to come to enjoy and desire holy things and to become men of Heaven. (no. 9)

St. John Paul II affirmed in this line: "In his intimate life - writes John Paul II - God is love (cf. 1 Jn 4,8.16: 1), essential love, common to the three divine Persons: personal love is the Holy Spirit , as the Spirit of the Father and the Son. For this, he searches the depths of God (2,10 Cor XNUMX:XNUMX), as an uncreated love-gift. It can be said that in the Holy Spirit the intimate life of the Triune God becomes entirely a gift, an exchange of mutual love between the divine Persons, and that through the Holy Spirit God exists as a gift ... the Holy Spirit, as consubstantial with the Father and to the Son in divinity, it is love and gift (uncreated), from which every gift to creatures (created gift) derives as from the source (fons vivus): the gift of existence to all things through creation. the giving of grace to men through the entire economy of salvation. As the Apostle Paul writes: "God's love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us." ".[40]

Let the Trinity and in particular the Holy Spirit be our guide in Truth and Charity.

3) Charity shines in Christ and is a fundamental part of Christ's teaching.

Charity shines in Christ, the Catechism affirms in n. 1823: “Jesus makes charity the new commandment. (Cf Jn 13,34:XNUMX.) "Jesus says:" This is my commandment: love one another as I have loved you "(Gv 15,12). And furthermore: «As the Father has loved me, so I too have loved you. Remain in my love "(Gv 15,9). Jesus shows divine, Trinitarian love by loving his "to the end" (Gv 13,1: XNUMX), and the disciples are invited to love one another by manifesting Jesus' love for them.

Immediately after the institution of the Eucharist, Jesus announces to his apostles his imminent departure for heaven and leaves them this teaching: I give you a new commandment: that you love one another as I have loved you (cf. Jn 13 , 33-35). The precept of love for neighbor in the Mosaic Law was very imperfect and it was badly understood and practiced by the Jews; Jesus calls his commandment of love new because he assigns him a new ideal which is he himself. Of course, the example is inimitable, but every Christian, with the help of Christ and the Trinity, must commit himself to following him from afar. Before leaving the Upper Room, Jesus offers himself again as a model of brotherly love (cf. Jn 15: 12-14). His sublime charity must be a model for us; Christ must live in us and his love for him must be manifested through us, therefore s. Paul can say, “Actually by the Law I died to the Law, that I may live for God. I was crucified with Christ, and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. And this life, which I live in the body, I live in the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself up for me. "(Gal 2,19:XNUMX ff)

St. Paul asks himself: who will separate us from the love of Christ? And he replies that neither death nor any creature will be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ (see Rom 8: 35-39). Here it is a question of the love of God and Christ for us; and s. Paul makes us understand that if we are not sure of our love for God, we can count on the persistence of divine love in Christ for us and precisely this love fixes our hope on unshakable foundations. (Cf. Ferdinand Prat "Charite" in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, ed.Beauchesne, 1932-1995, Tome 2 - Colonne 516)

St. Thomas highlights Christ's sublime charity in this text which is part of the Second Reading of the current Office of Readings on the Solemnity of Corpus Domini “Finally, no one can express the sweetness of this sacrament. By means of it one tastes the spiritual sweetness in its very source and one remembers that lofty charity which Christ demonstrated in his passion.
He instituted the Eucharist at the last supper, when, celebrated Easter with his disciples, he was about to pass from the world to the Father.
The Eucharist is the memorial of the Passion, the fulfillment of the figures of the Old Covenant, the greatest of all the wonders worked by Christ, the admirable document of his immense love for men. "[41] Speaking of the sublime charity of Christ St. Thomas further states: "
“… Unde, cum gratia Christi fuerit perfectissima, consequens est quod ex ipsa processerint virtutes ad perficiendum singulas potentias animae, quantum ad omnes animae actus. Et ita Christus habuit omnes virtutes. … Unde per hoc non ostenditur quod Christus non habuit virtutes, sed quod lui habuit eas perfectissime, ultra communem modum. ”(IIIª q. 7 a. 2 co. Et ad 2m) Since the grace of Christ was most perfect, from it all the virtues flowed and in a most perfect degree; therefore Christ had sublime charity. Christ was full of grace, that is, he possessed it totally and perfectly, explains St. Thomas:
“Respondeo dicendum quod plene dicitur haberi quod totaliter et perfecte habetur. … Utroque autem modo Christus habuit gratiae plenitudinem. Primo quidem, quia lui habuit eam in summo, secundum perfectissimum modum qui potest haberi. Et hoc quidem apparet prima, ex propinquitate animae Christi ad causam gratiae. … Secundo, ex comparatione eius ad effectum. Sic enim recipiebat anima Christi gratiam ut ex ea quodammodo transfunderetur in alios. Et ideo oportuit quod haberet maximam gratiam, sicut ignis, qui est causa caloris in omnibus calidis, est maxime calidus. Similiter etiam quantum ad virtutem gratiae, plene habuit gratiam, quia habuit eam ad omnes operationes vel effectus gratiae. Et hoc ideo, quia conferebatur and the universal gratia tanquam cuidam principle in general habentium gratias. …. (IIIª q. 7 a. 9 co.)

Christ had the fullness of grace, that is, he had grace totally and perfectly. More precisely, He had the fullness of grace because he had it in the highest degree, in the most perfect way possible. Christ was full of grace in that his soul was joined in a most perfect way to God and therefore in a most perfect way he received divine grace.

Christ was full of grace also with regard to its effect, in fact his soul received it in order to transfuse it to others and so it was necessary that he have the maximum grace as the cause of grace in others.
Equally also with regard to the virtuality of grace, he had the fullness of grace, because he had it for all its operations and for all its effects. And this is because He had grace as a universal principle for all who receive it. Christ's grace was supreme: “Respondeo dicendum quod aliquam formam non posse augeri contingit dupliciter, uno modo, ex parte ipsius subiecti; alio way, ex parte illius formae…. Finis autem gratiae est unio creaturee rationalis ad Deum. Non potest autem esse, nec intelligi, maior unio creaturee rationalis ad Deum quam quae est in persona. Et ideo gratia Christi pertingit usque ad summam mensuram gratiae. Sic ergo manifestum est quod gratia Christi non potuit augeri ex parte ipsius gratiae. Sed neque ex parte ipsius subiecti. Quia Christus, secundum quod homo, a primo instanti suae conceptionis fuit verus et plenus comprehensor. "(III, q. 7 a. 12 in c.) The grace of Christ reached the supreme perfection of grace, in fact grace has as its end the union of the rational creature with God but the union of man with God in Christ is supreme because this union is accomplished in the Person. Christ's grace did not grow because it was perfect from the Incarnation. Christ, from his conception, was a traveler but he was also a true understanding, he had as a man the blessed vision that is proper to the saints of Heaven: "Ad primum ergo dicendum quod Christus, secundum quod homo, immediate regulabatur a verbo Dei, unde non indigebat enclosure Angelorum. Et iterum secundum animam erat comprehensor; sed ratione passibilitatis corporis, he erat viator. " (I, q. 113 a. 4 ad) According to the soul, Christ was an understanding, he had the beatific vision, but according to his body he was a traveler. Further s. Thomas affirms that the way of charity which is proper to the blessed was possible for Christ: “This is the second way of the perfect love of God, and it is proper to the blessed understanders. …. The second way is then possible for no one in the present life, unless he is both a traveler and an understanding as our Lord Jesus Christ was. "[42]. St. Thomas says again in this regard “… et ideo illam perfectionem caritatis quae erit post hanc vitam, nullus in hac vita habere potest, nisi sit viator et comprehensor simul; quod est proprium Christi. " (De virtutibus, q. 2 a. 10 co.). As you can see s. Thomas affirms that the perfection of charity which is proper to the blessed in Heaven no one can have while he is a traveler if he is not also an understanding, which is proper to Christ; it seems clear to me that here s. Thomas affirms that Christ had, while he was alive, the charity of the blessed but unlike them Christ was also a traveler and could deserve. The charity of Christ was the charity of the One who was a traveler and an understanding, it was a supreme charity, excellent in that he was an understanding and which on the other hand allowed him to merit as he was a traveler, as the Doctor himself says in another text. : “Nec tamen per caritatem meruit inquantum erat caritas comprehensoris, sed inquantum erat viatoris, nam ipse fuit simul viator et comprehensor, ut supra habitum est. "(III, q. 19 a. 3 ad 1.)

Christ, as man, therefore had a most perfect charity; to him, as an understanding and traveler, the charity of the blessed was possible, however, unlike the blessed, his charity was meritorious in that he was also a traveler. To indicate the perfection of the virtues and therefore of the charity of Christ St. Thomas says, taking up Plotinus' affirmations, that Christ had the virtues of a purged soul: “Christus .. habuit virtutes .. perfectissime, ultra communem modum. Sicut etiam Plotinus posuit quendam sublimem modum virtutum, quas esse dixit purgati animi. " (III q. 7 a. 2 to 2m.). Christ's charity was in a certain way infinite, he could say yes. Thomas, like his grace: «Solus autem Christus aliis potest sufficienter mereri: quia potest in naturam, inquantum Deus est, et caritas sua quodammodo est infinita, sicut et gratia, ut supra dictum est, dist. 13, qu. 1, art. 2, quaestiunc. 2 "(Super Sent., III d.19 a.1 q.1). Charity is manifested and shines in Christ, who did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it, Jesus said in fact: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. " (Mt 5, 17) and Christ did the Father's will perfectly and perfectly observed the Father's commandments, in fact he said: “I will no longer speak with you, because he is coming the prince of the world; He can do nothing against me, but the world must know that I love the Father, and as the Father has commanded me, so I act…. Remain in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and remain in his love for him. I have told you these things so that my joy may be in you and your joy may be complete. "(Jn 14, 30s; 15, 10s)

Charity leads to living in the divine commandments, Christ's charity led him to perfect observance of the commandments; only by living in the commandments does one remain in charity. Charity led the soul of Christ, in this line, to a perfect submission to the will of God. The Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in this line in n. 475 “… the Word made flesh has humanly wanted, in obedience to the Father, all that he has divinely decided with the Father and with the Holy Spirit for our salvation.[43]. " The Council of Constantinople specifies that at the human will of Christ "follows, without opposition or reluctance, or rather, is subjected to his divine and omnipotent will".[44]

Christ's will was fully and perfectly subjected to his divine will and, therefore, fully observed the divine law. Jesus made it clear: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. Truly I tell you, until heaven and earth have passed away, not a jot or a sign from the law will pass, without all being completed. Therefore, whoever breaks one of these precepts, even the least, and teaches men to do the same, will be considered least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever observes them and teaches them to men will be considered great in the kingdom of heaven "(Mt 5,17-19). The Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in n. 578 that Jesus is the only one who was able to observe the divine Law perfectly (cf. Jn 8,46:580.). Christ observed the Law in a perfect way and only He, God-man could do it (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church n. XNUMX)

Christ brings the Law to full fulfillment by giving it in a divine way the definitive interpretation "it was said ... but I tell you" (Mt 5,21.27.33s.38.43 etc) and implementing it in the most perfect way (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 581). So that the Law is now Christ himself, it is a living and loving Law that must be welcomed and implemented in him and with him.

Veritatis Splendor says: "Jesus himself is the living" fulfillment "of the Law insofar as he realizes its authentic meaning with the total gift of himself: he himself becomes living and personal Law, which invites us to follow him, gives the grace to share his own life and love and offers the energy to bear witness to it in his choices and works (cf. Jn 13,34: 35-16) ". (VS, n. XNUMX)

May the Trinity have mercy on us and allow us to bring about the perfection of charity in our life in the perfect observance of the Word of God.

4) The charity in us.

As we have seen, charity leads to living in the divine commandments, Christ's charity is fulfilled in the most exact observance of the holy Law and in the perfection of the Law itself; we too must, in him, implement the holy law of God in charity. Charity, as we will see better later, is a virtue that we live in sanctifying grace; charity is an infused virtue. The Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in n. 1997: “Through Baptism the Christian participates in the grace of Christ, the Head of his body. ... "

The grace that is divine life in us brings charity into us and with it life in the commandments.

Veritatis Splendor states: “…. In this way St. Augustine again admirably summarizes the Pauline dialectic of law and grace: «The law, therefore, was given in order to invoke grace; the grace was given to keep the law ”. (De spiritu et littera, 19, 4: CSEL 60, 187.)… Saint Thomas was able to write that the New Law is the grace of the Holy Spirit given through faith in Christ. (Cf Summa Theologiae, I-II, q. 106, a. 1, conclus. And ad 2 um.) ". (VS, no. 23 ff.)

I take advantage of this quote from St. Augustine to emphasize that the Fathers of the Church spoke a great deal about charity and how St. Augustine is the Doctor of Charity for the West, s. John Chrysostom is for the East[45] and it is precisely on the indications of the Fathers that all subsequent reflection on this virtue is based.

Precisely the Fathers greatly emphasized the supernatural dimension of charity. In the Dictionnaire de Spiritualité we read in this regard: “La charité surnaturelle est un don de Dieu et provient de la grâce. Elle est un don de la Trinité tout entière (Didyme d'Alexandrie, De Spiritu Sancto, n ° 16, PG., 39, 1049), mais elle est rapportée normalment au Saint-Esprit (ibid., N ° 17; S. Augustin, Serm. 265, cp. 9, n ° 10, PL., 38, 1223; Diadoque, De perfect., Cp. 74). S. Augustin et ses disciples of him ont beaucoup insisted on the divine origin de la charité, dans la lutte contre les pélagiens et les semi-pélagiens: "La charité, qui est une vertu, vient de Dieu et non de nous"[46]. Ils répètent de toutes les façons qu'elle vient de Dieu (De natura et gratia, cp. 64, n ° 77, PL., 44, 276), que nous ne acquérons pas par nos seules forces[47]"[48].

The Fathers clearly affirm that charity is an infused virtue, they support the supernatural dimension of charity and therefore its relationship with grace.[49]

God clearly commands charity towards God, towards ourselves and towards our neighbor: “You will love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. The second then is similar to that: You will love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets depend on these two commandments ”. (Mt 22,37ss)

Charity is commanded to us by Christ in particular through "his" commandment: "This is my commandment: love one another as I have loved you" (Gv 15,12).

Charity is necessary for salvation, the Fathers affirm this very clearly. This is the fundamental affirmation that is repeated by the Fathers in various forms: without charity no good work has value (cf. St. John Chrysostom, Hom. 40 in Act. Apostolorum n ° 4, PG., 60, 285). Without charity nothing is pleasing to God says yes. Clement I in his letter to the Corinthians (n. 49). Without charity, all other goods are useless, says s. John Chrysostom and other saints reaffirm this concept[50] Eusebius of Alexandria states that man cannot do anything good if he does not have charity (cf. Eusebius of Alexandria, "Sermo de caritate", PG., 86, I, 324D)[51]

Charity, in particular insofar as it is implemented, is the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5), it makes us live in Christ and makes us observe the commandments in him (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1824); Jesus says: “Remain in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will remain in my love "(Gv 15,9: 10-1) St. Paul said of charity: “Charity is patient, charity is benign; charity is not envious, it does not boast, it does not swell, it does not lack respect, it does not seek its interest, it is not angry, it does not take into account the evil received, it does not enjoy injustice, but is pleased with the truth. He covers everything, he believes everything, he hopes everything, he endures everything ”(13,4 Cor 7: XNUMX-XNUMX).

Charity is the first of the theological virtues and is superior to all virtues (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1826); it inspires and animates the exercise of the other virtues: “… it is the form of virtues; he articulates and orders them among themselves; it is the source and end of their Christian practice. "(Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1827)

Mercy, which is so much talked about in our times, is the fruit and effect of charity (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1829; II-IIae q. 28 pr.)

St. Anthony of Padua states "The Apostle in today's epistle says of charity:" If I spoke in the tongues of men and angels, but did not have charity, I am like a resounding bronze or a clanging harpsichord "(1 Cor 13,1 , XNUMX). Augustine says: I call charity that impulse of the soul that pushes us to benefit from God for himself, and to enjoy himself and neighbor in order to God. And whoever does not have this charity, even if he does so many good things, so many good works, toil in vain; precisely for this reason the Apostle says: Even if I spoke the tongues of angels, etc. Charity led the Son of God to the gallows of the cross. "[52]

May the Lord enlighten us and grant us to live in true and holy charity.

a) Charity enables us to participate in divine charity and is the aim of the Law.

Starting from the fact that God is charity and gives us charity and from the fact that the Holy Spirit, who is Charity, kindles our hearts with love for God and neighbor (cf. St. Augustine, "De Trinitate", XV, 17, 31) it is not strange that in Somma Theologica s. Thomas affirms, as we already anticipated above, that our charity is participation in divine charity: “… etiam caritas qua formaliter diligimus proximum est quaedam participatio divinae caritatis. … ”(IIª-IIae q. 23 a. 2 ad 1 and 2) Charity is therefore a certain participation of ours in divine charity, God in fact is Charity.

Charity raises our human capacity to love to the supernatural perfection of divine love (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1827). Charity makes us participate in a supernatural way in divine love.

To fully understand these affirmations we must consider that charity is a virtue infused in us by the Holy Spirit through sanctifying grace. St. Thomas states “… caritas est amicitia quaedam hominis ad Deum fundata super communicationem beatitudinis aeternae. Haec autem communicatio non est secundum bona naturalia, sed secundum dona gratuito, quia, ut diciturRm. VI, gratia Dei vita aeterna. Unde et ipsa caritas facultatem naturae excedit. Quod autem excedit naturae facultatem non potest esse neque naturale neque per potentias naturales acquisitum, quia effectus naturalis non transcendit suam causam. Unde caritas non potest neque naturaliter nobis inesse, neque per vires naturales est acquired, sed per infusionem spiritus sancti, qui est amor patris et filii, cuius participatio in nobis est ipsa caritas created, sicut supra dictum est. ”(II-II q. 24 a.2) We can substantially translate these statements of s. Thomas in the sense that: charity is a friendship of man with God, founded on the communication of eternal bliss. Now, this communication does not concern goods of nature, but the gifts of grace. Therefore charity surpasses the capacities of nature. But that which surpasses the capacities of nature cannot be of the natural order, nor can it be acquired with the natural faculties: since a natural effect does not overcome its own cause. Therefore charity cannot be found in us by nature, nor can it be acquired with natural forces, but it is due to the infusion of the Holy Spirit, who is the love of the Father and the Son, and whose participation in us is precisely charity. created. " [53]

Created charity is participation in the uncreated Charity which is the Holy Spirit: the Love of the Father and of the Son; for charity the Holy Spirit is sent into us making us participate in Himself.

Charity is caused by sanctifying grace, as explained by St. Thomas: "... it is evident that grace, which guides us towards the end which is the vision of God, causes God's love in us." [54]  Sanctifying grace, through which man becomes similar to God and participates in the divine nature, guides us towards the end which is the vision of God in Heaven and causes charity in us.

This grace makes us participate in the divine nature (cf.  I-II, q. 110 a. 3 in co.) And causes charity in us which in turn makes us participate in divine charity.

The participations we are talking about are also participations in divine goodness (cf.  II-II q. 23 a. 2 ad 1.), the last and perfect participation in divine goodness will take place for us men in Heaven with the blessed vision, as St. Thomas: "Ultima et completissima participatio suae di lui (= Dei) bonitatis consistit in vista essentiae ipsius" (see Super Sent., III d. 19 a. 5 sol. I.)

It is necessary to specify that our participation in divine charity and in the Charity which is the Holy Spirit takes place with our union with God, in fact charity is a virtue that unites us to God and for which we love him: "Sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit, in libro de moribus Eccles., caritas est virtus quae, cum nostra rectissima affectio est, contiungit nos Deo, qua eum diligimus. Answer… Unde… caritas attingit Deum, quia contiungit nos Deo… "(II-IIae q. 23 a. 3 sc et co.)

More precisely, virtue consists in accepting the rule of human acts which is twofold: human reason and God; obviously the highest rule of human acts is God and the highest virtues are those which we are regulated by God. Charity is the highest virtue that makes us participate in divine charity, unites us to God and makes us welcome God as the rule of human acts (cf. II-IIae q. 23 a. 3 co.).

I remember that for s. Thomas God is Law, Eternal Law (cf. I-II q. 93 a.4 in c.) Charity is therefore the highest virtue that makes us live under the guidance of God, who is the highest rule of human acts and Eternal Law! The more perfectly man lets himself be guided by God, the more perfect his life will be; the culmination of the moral and spiritual life is therefore reached in charity and for charity. St. Thomas affirms: “.. Now, the spiritual life essentially consists in charity, without which man considers himself as nothing in the spiritual order… Therefore, absolutely speaking, he who is perfect in charity is perfect in the spiritual life. ... In fact, St. Paul, writing to the Colossians, attributes perfection principally to charity, when you enumerate many virtues, that is, mercy, kindness, humility, continues: "And above all these things keep charity, which is the bond of perfection "(Col., III, 14)." (S. Tommaso d 'Aquino "The perfection of the spiritual life" Unione Tipografico-Editrice Torinese, First edition eBook: March 2013, n. 2)

St. Paul explains that "The purpose of the command, however, is charity, which comes from a pure heart, a good conscience and a sincere faith." (1 Tim. 1,5) and St. Augustine affirms in this regard: “My brothers, whoever has a heart full of charity understands without any error and guards without any effort the manifold richness of the divine Scriptures and that immense doctrine. The Apostle testifies: The fulfillment of the law is charity. And again: The purpose of the precept is charity, which flows from a pure heart, from a good conscience and from sincere faith. What is the purpose of the precept if not its fulfillment? And what is the fulfillment of the precept if not the fulfillment of the law? Therefore that passage in which [the Apostle] said: The fulfillment of the law is charity coincides with what he added later: The purpose of the precept is charity. Nor can it be doubted in any way that the man in whom charity resides is the temple of God, because God is charity 3, John affirms it ”.[55]

Charity is the purpose of the Law that God has given us, explains in the Sum against the Gentiles s. Thomas: "... the end of the whole law is that man love God. Hence the affirmation of St. Paul:" The end of the precept is charity "(5 Tim., I, 38). And in the Gospel we read that "the first and the greatest of the commandments is this: You shall love the Lord your God" (Matt., XXII, XNUMX). This is why the new law, being more perfect, is called the "law of love"; while the ancient law, because it is more imperfect, is called the "law of fear". ... the divine law guides men above all to dedicate themselves to the things of God ... "[56]

The divine law guides men above all to dedicate themselves to the things of God and its end is the charity of this world and, ultimately, the charity of Heaven.

In this line we understand that the purpose of the Law is to lead man to love God with all his heart, soul, mind and strength, as the Holy Scripture says (cf. Mt 22,37:XNUMX), because this degree of perfection in charity is commanded by God to man; St. Thomas explains to us in this regard: "... we love God with all our hearts, with all our souls, with all our minds and with all our strengths, if there is nothing in us that is currently or usually not referred to. to God; well, this degree of perfection in the love of God is absolutely commanded to man. "[57]

The purpose of the Law is therefore above all that man, with divine help, love God in such a way that there is nothing in his life that is not referred to God, currently or habitually; this degree of charity, and therefore of participation in divine love, is, in fact, absolutely commanded to man and only through it is it possible to reach the charity of Heaven.

May God grant us to live better and better in true charity.

b) Charity makes us observe God's commandments.

God enlighten us better and better.

We have said that charity is the highest virtue that makes us participate in divine charity, unites us to God and makes us welcome God as the rule of human acts (cf. II-IIae q. 23 a. 3 co.), We have specified that for s. Thomas God is Law, Eternal Law (cf. I-II q. 93 a.4 in c.) And that, therefore, charity is the highest virtue that makes us live under the guidance of God who is the highest rule of human acts and Eternal Law!

Charity is a virtue that makes us observe the Law, makes us welcome the highest Rule of our life, God, who is the Eternal Law, and guides us to live in Christ on the path of the holy commandments and of his Word; charity makes us live in Christ who is the Living Law (VS, n. 16). As Christ, in charity, observed the commandments of the Father (cf. Jn 15,10:1), charity also leads us to observe the commandments of God; in the first letter of John it is written: “… because in this consists the love of God, in observing his commandments; and his commandments are not burdensome. " (5,3 Jn 14,21) In John's Gospel we read, again: "Whoever accepts my commandments and keeps them, he loves me." (Jn 6,17:XNUMX). In the book of Wisdom we read in this line “His very sincere principle of him is the desire for education; the care of education is charity; charity is observance of his laws; respect for the laws is a guarantee of immortality. "(Wis XNUMXs).

Charity insofar as it perfects faith (cf. II-II q. 4 a. 3) makes us believe perfectly in the Word of God, in the teaching of Christ and of the Church, and makes us observe this teaching, therefore this virtue makes us keep the divine commandments. Charity places us under the guidance of God who is the highest rule and eternal law, as we have seen, and obviously God makes us observe the commandments that he himself has given us.

Charity therefore implies the observance of the commandments and only in this observance of the commandments can we remain in charity (cf. VS, n. 24); Indeed, Jesus says: "If you keep my commandments, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and remain in his love for him" (Jn 15,10:XNUMX).

St. Augustine affirms in this line: “Whoever has my commandments and observes them: this is who loves me. Who keeps them in memory, and carries them out in life; who keeps them in mind in his words, and expresses them in customs; who has them because he listens to them, and observes them by practicing them; or who has them because he practices them, and constantly observes them, that's who loves me. Love must be demonstrated with facts otherwise it is an empty and sterile word. "[58]

St. Thomas explains in this line that charity necessarily produces in us the observance of the commandments: “Secundum quod facit caritas, est divinorum mandatorum observantia. Gregorius: nunquam est Dei amor otiosus: operatur enim magna si est; yes true operari renuit, amor non est. Unde manifestum signum caritatis est promptitudo implendi divina praecepta. Videmus enim amantem propter amatum magna et difficile operari. Ioan. XIV, 23: si quis diligit me, sermonem meum servabit. " (“Collationes in decem praeceptis”, proemium) If charity is truly in the soul, it makes the person observe and implement the commandments.

b, 1) Positive and negative commandments and charity

Charity, according to St. Thomas observes: both affirmative and negative commands, that is, those that prohibit certain actions, in fact charity does not act unjustly. “Sed considerandum, quod qui mandatum et legem divinae dilectionis servat, totam legem implet. Est autem duplex modus divinorum mandatorum. Quaedam enim sunt affirmativa: et haec quidem implet caritas; quia plenitudo legis quae consistit in mandatis, est dilectio, qua mandata servantur. Quaedam vero sunt prohibitoria; haec etiam implet caritas, quia non agit perperam, ut dicit apostolus I Cor. XIII. " (See St. Thomas "Collationes in decem praeceptis", proemium)

Thomas specifies in this regard, as we saw that: negative precepts oblige always and forever, always and in every circumstance[59] In the above texts we have seen Veritatis Splendor at n. 52 strongly reiterates the affirmations of St. Thomas about the negative precepts of the divine law. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says in this line that some acts, by reason of their object, are always gravely contrary to the divine law among them are: "... blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. "(Catechism of the Catholic Church n.1756)

It also explains s. Thomas who: “… while the negative precepts of the law forbid sinful acts, the affirmative precepts lead to acts of virtue. But sinful acts are evil in themselves, and can be done in a good way in any way, nowhere and in no time: since they are bound by themselves to an evil end, as Aristotle says. And so the negative precepts oblige always and in all cases. Virtuous acts, on the other hand, should not be done in any way, but by observing the due circumstances that are required for the act to be virtuous: that is, doing it where it should, when it should, and how it should be. And since the dispositions of things that are ordered to the end are carried out according to the reason for the end, among the circumstances of virtuous acts one must especially keep in mind the reason for the end, which is the good of virtue. Therefore if there is the omission of a circumstance relating to the virtuous act, which totally eliminates the good of virtue, the act is contrary to the precept. If, on the other hand, a circumstance is missing which does not completely remove virtue, although it does not perfectly achieve the good of virtue, the act is not contrary to the precept. This is why the Philosopher affirms, that if we deviate a little from the right means, we are not against virtue: if, on the contrary, we go far away, virtue is destroyed in one's own act. "[60]

Regarding the positive precepts and in particular about the precept of almsgiving, which is connected to the fourth commandment s. Thomas affirms that almsgiving is obligatory for the superfluous and in favor of those who are in extreme need, in other cases it is recommended. (II- II q. 32 a. 5 in c.)

We specify that no dispensation can be given from the divine precepts of the Decalogue: "Et ideo praecepta Decalogi sunt omnino indispensabilia." (Iª-IIae q. 100 a. 8 co.)

In conclusion: the precepts of the Decalogue do not admit dispensation, they do not admit epikeia [61] and the negative precepts of the Decalogue are valid always and in every circumstance.

Charity makes us observe the divine precepts, therefore it never makes us perform acts contrary to negative precepts and makes us perform virtuous acts, commanded by positive precepts, observing the circumstances required for the act to be indeed virtuous; moreover charity, if it is truly in the soul, does not dispense from the commandments and does not apply epikeia to them!

What has been said so far, in this paragraph, leads me to rethink n. 6 of the letter of the Argentine Bishops, which states: "It is connected to reconocer que, in a concrete case, hay limitaciones que atenúan la responsabilidad y la culpabilidad (cf. 301-302), particularly when a person consider que caería en una ulterior falta dañando a los hijos de la nueva unión, Amoris laetitia abre la posibilidad del access to the sacramentos de la Reconciliación y la Eucaristía (cf. notas 336 y 351). Estos a su vez disponen a the person to follow madurando y creciendo con la fuerza de la gracia. "[62]

As we have said, charity makes us observe the divine precepts and makes us propose to observe these precepts; charity, therefore, never makes us perform acts contrary to the negative precepts of the Decalogue and makes us perform virtuous acts, commanded by the positive precepts, observing the due circumstances required so that the act is indeed virtuous; moreover, if charity is truly in the soul, it does not dispense itself or others from the commandments and does not apply epikeia to them; therefore charity leads us to never commit adultery, not even to save one's family, and it leads us to never dispense anyone from the commandment which prohibits adultery; equally charity leads us to never commit homosexual acts, not even to save one's family, and it leads us to never dispense anyone from the commandment that prohibits such acts.

Charity, I stress, never causes one to commit adultery or any serious sin, not even to save one's family; charity does not lead to dispensing oneself or others from the ten commandments and does not lead to applying epikeia to them even to save one's family.

For no reason, not even to save the family, we are authorized to put the 10 commandments under our feet, for no reason we are authorized or we can authorize to violate the negative commands of the Decalogue and charity certainly does not commit any act against the commandments and therefore he does not commit adultery even to save his own family.

Therefore, it is not charity that guides people to carry out acts objectively contrary to the Law of God, it is not charity that leads to acts of adultery, rape, pedophilia, murder ... etc. it is not charity that keeps people in carrying out objectively serious acts, it is not charity that keeps people in grave sin, it is not charity that keeps people on the next occasion of sin ... it is not charity that leads to dispensing people from the implementation of divine commands.

And it is not charity that leads to giving the Sacraments and the Eucharist to those who live in notorious sin and want to remain there, with evident scandal. Furthermore, as we will see in the next paragraph, grave sin excludes charity, and adultery and homosexual acts are grave sins.

We will also see, further on, that the so-called extenuating circumstances referred to by Amoris Laetitia and the letter of the Argentine Bishops justify the unjustifiable, that is, real serious sins and therefore open the doors to serious sins and to the reception of Sacraments from those who remain in them. without really proposing to get out of it; in this sense these documents, while saying in words that they want to follow the path of charity (cf. Amoris Laetitia n. 306), do not follow it in reality.

God enlighten us better and better!

c) Charity is lost through non-observance of the commandments, that is, through grave sin.

Charity, which is lived in the observance of the commandments, is lost through failure to observe them in serious matters, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in n. 1855: “The mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man due to a grave violation of the Law of God ... "

Also s. Thomas says with great clarity that grave sin cancels charity from the human heart.

In the Commentary on the Ten Commandments, St. Thomas states: “Sed ad hoc quod istud praeceptum dilectionis possit perfecte impleri, quatuor requiruntur…. Quartum est omnimoda peccatorum vitatio. Nullus enim potest diligere Deum in sin existens. Matth. VI, 24: non potestis Deo serve et mammonae. Unde si in sin existis, Deum non diligis. Sed ille diligebat qui dicebat, Jesse. XXXVIII, 3: memento quomodo ambulaverim coram te in veritate et in corde perfecto. Praeterea dicebat Elias, III Reg. XVIII, 21: quousque claudicatis in duas partes? Sicut claudicans nunc huc nunc illuc inclinatur; sic et peccator nunc peccat, nunc Deum quaerere nititur. " ("Collationes in decem praeceptis", a. 1) I translate the part that most directly connects to what we are saying: no one who is in sin can love God, so if you are in sin you do not love God. But he loved (really) God who said to God: remember how I walked before you in truth and with a perfect heart (Isaiah 38). The sin that cancels charity from the human heart is grave or mortal sin, as s very clearly says. Thomas in Somma Theologica explaining that it is essential for charity to love God so as to want to submit to him entirely, observing in everything the norm of his precepts and directing everything to him; therefore every act of mortal sin is contrary to charity and incompatible with charity; charity is lost through a single act of mortal sin: “… consequens est ut statim per unum actum peccati mortalis habitus caritatis perdatur. "(IIª-IIae q. 24 a. 12 co.) Therefore it is essential to love to love God to the point of wanting to submit to him entirely, and to follow the precepts fully: everything that conflicts with his precepts is openly contrary to charity, and therefore excludes it.…. We emphasize that adultery is a serious sin and so are homosexual acts ...

“Prohibetur autem adulterium uxori, et viro. Sed prius dicendum est de uxoris adulterio, quia maius peccatum videtur committere. Committit autem tria peccata gravia uxor moechando, quae insinuantur Eccli. XXIII, 32-34: mulier omnis relinquens virum suum of him (…) first in law altissimi incredibilis fuit, secundo virum suum dereliquit, tertio adulterio fornicata est, et ex alio viro filios statuit sibi. … Lei Est ergo mulier moechans, sacrilegious, proditrix, furatrix. Viri vero peccant non minus quam uxores, licet sibi when blandiantur. " ("Collationes in decem praeceptis", a. 8) ...

Therefore the grave sin of adultery excludes charity from the heart of those who do it or want to do it…. the Roman Catechism states: “That if man can be justified, and from being evil to become good, even before practicing the individual prescriptions of the Law in external actions; he cannot, however, who already has the use of reason, transform himself from a sinner into a righteous one, if he is not willing to observe all the commandments of God. " [63]

May God fill us with holy charity and grant us to stay well away from mortal sin.

d) Charity is ordered.

The Bible clearly presents the order of charity first of all when it affirms that it is necessary to love God with one's whole self (Dt. 6; Mt 22,37) and one's neighbor as oneself (Mt 22,37) and in other passages.

In the "City of God" s. Augustine explains that the order is: "... it is the arrangement of equal and unequal things that assigns each one's place."[64]

The Fathers, following the biblical indications, outline the order of charity by affirming that first of all it is necessary to love God, therefore they specify that we must love our neighbor as ourselves, with regard to our neighbors they specify that we must ordinarily first love our parents, then our children. , then the people of our family.[65]

Origen, the great biblical scholar of the third century, develops the theme of the order of charity on the basis of the overall message of the Bible starting from the text of Song of Songs 4,2 which according to the texts on which he relies states: order charity in me; this author, in his commentary on the Song of Songs, in particular, consecrates a long reflection to the order of charity starting from the aforementioned verse[66]

St. Gregory of Nyssa likewise in his Homilies on the Song of Songs, through the aforementioned passage of this biblical book, deals with the necessary order of charity and says: "Therefore, it is necessary to know the order of love, which arranges things by means of the Law : how we should love God and how we should love our neighbor, as the wife and as the enemy, so that the implementation of love does not happen to be disordered and inverted. Indeed, one must love God with all one's heart and soul and one's own strengths and feelings 53, and one's neighbor, on the other hand, as oneself; the wife, if you have a pure soul, as Christ loves the Church; if, on the other hand, you are more subject to passions, like your own body; so, in fact, the one who puts order to these problems commands, Paul. The enemy must be loved in not repaying evil with evil, but returning injustice with benefit. "[67]

St. Augustine deals with the order of charity starting precisely from the Scriptures and in particular from the text of the Canticle just indicated, which for him also deals with the order of charity, and pointing out that it is necessary to love in an orderly way and that above all, in that order is God[68]

St. Augustine specifies, in line with a wise biblical interpretation, that we must love ourselves less than we love God and says that we must love others more than our body, evidently no more than our soul (cf. St. Augustine, "De doctrina christiana. "Lib. 1, cp. 26-27, PL., 34, 29)

We need to learn to love ourselves according to God, that is, by working for our own eternal salvation.

Charity, insofar as it is ordained, takes into account the merits of one's neighbor, his faith, the services rendered to the Church, his relationship with God[69] therefore Origen states: "Si autem filius malus est et domesticus bonus domesticus in caritate filii collocetur" (Origen, "Homilia II in Canticum Canticorum", n ° 7, PG., 13, 54) If the son is wicked and the servant is good, the servant is loved with the charity that belongs to the child.

It still says yes. Augustine: "In order to have a well-ordered love, it is necessary to avoid the following: to love what is not to be loved, to love more what is to be loved less, to love equally what one should love or less or more, or to love less or more what is to be loved alike. The sinner, whoever he is, as a sinner is not to be loved; man, every man, insofar as he is a man, must be loved for the love of God; God must be loved for himself. "[70]

Therefore we are not to love the sinner as a sinner; we must love him as a man.

Man, every man, insofar as he is man, must be loved for the love of God ... and therefore love of neighbor will consist above all in bringing him to the love of God.

"Now God the teacher teaches two main commandments, that is, the love of God and the love of neighbor, in which man recognizes three objects that he must love: God, himself, his neighbor, and that in loving himself, no one errs loves God. It follows that he also provides for his neighbor so that he may love God because he is ordered to love him as himself, so that his wife, children, family members and other people can and wants to see to him in this way. , if you need it. "[71].

If loving ourselves according to God means committing ourselves to our salvation, loving our neighbor according to God will first of all work for his salvation.[72]

For the Fathers, spiritual charity obviously comes before bodily charity, because, according to the Scriptures and Tradition, the soul is immortal and the eternal salvation of soul and body depends on the soul.

In the wake of the doctrine of the Fathers and on the basis of Scripture, always with regard to the order of charity, in the Catechism of the Catholic Church at n. 2197 states: “The fourth commandment opens the second table of the Law. Indicates the order of charity. ... "... and at no. 2239 of the same text we read: “The love and service of homeland they derive from the duty of gratitude and from the order of charity. "

Charity is, therefore, ordered, yes. Thomas affirms this with great clarity and in the Sum Theological, in a question which speaks precisely of the order of charity, St. Thomas specifies that God is to be loved more than our neighbor and more than ourselves, and we must love ourselves more than our neighbor. Therefore first of all God is to be loved more than his neighbor (cf. IIª-IIae q. 26 a. 2 co.) And more than ourselves (cf. IIª-IIae q. 26 a. 3 co.), He is to be loved above everything, with all our heart, mind, soul and strength, then we must love ourselves, in particular we must love ourselves as for the soul and, as for the salvation of the soul, we must love our neighbor more than our body . (cf. IIª-IIae q. 26 a. 5 co.), the Catechism states in this line in nn. 2093: "The first commandment commands us to love God above all, (Cf Dt 6,4-5.) And all creatures for him and because of him."

Further, the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in n. 1822: "Charity is the theological virtue by which we love God above all things for himself ..." The Tridentine Catechism affirms in n. 249 “Since the charity with which we love God is the greatest, it follows that contrition must bring with it a most vehement pain of soul. If we are to love God above all, we must also detest above all what distances us from him. … So, the same reason that obliges us to recognize that God must be loved supremely also obliges us to bring utmost hatred to sin. ... We note again that, according to Saint Bernard, neither limit nor measure can be prescribed for charity, because the measure of loving God is to love him without measure (De dilig. God, 1, 1). Therefore no limit should be placed on the detestation of sin. "[73]

The order of charity is therefore fixed in the Bible as precisely, in particular, it commands us to love God above all, it commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves and because, as seen, it commands us to honor our parents ; on the other hand, this order commands us, as the Catechism of Trent and with it Tradition says[74] to hate sin utterly.

According to s. Thomas precisely because the order of charity is commanded by God sins whoever does not act according to this order: "Ex hoc ergo ipso quod alterum quod est minus diligendum, aequiparo in dilectione ei quod diligendum est magis, non totum dilectionis quod debeo, impendo ei quod magis diligendum est; et similiter etiam patet in aliis. Unde caritatis ordo est in praecepto; et peccat qui praepostere agit, ut in littera dicitur. "(Super Sent., lib. 3 d. 29 q. 1 a. 1 ad 5.) St. Thomas himself repeats what was said elsewhere in the Sum Theological, in fact he states:" Sed contra est quod… Deus causat in nobis orderm caritatis, secundum illud Cant. II, ordinavit in me caritatem. Ergo ordo caritatis sub praecepto legis cadit.

Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, modus qui pertinet ad rationem virtuosi actus cadit sub praecepto quod datur de actu virtutis. Ordo autem caritatis pertinet ad ipsam rationem virtutis, cum accipiatur secundum proportionem dilectionis ad diligibile, ut ex supradictis patet. Unde manifestum est quod ordo caritatis must fall sub praecepto. "(IIª-IIae q. 44 a. 8)

First of all, I would like to point out that St. Thomas quotes about the order of charity the famous text of Song of Songs 2,4 already reported by other ancient Doctors and exegetes.

Furthermore, as can be seen, s. Thomas confirms the sed contra affirmation in the answer he gives: the order of charity is commanded by God! And since precisely this command affirms that we must love God above all, yes. Thomas asks himself how one can love God totally and replies that this can be achieved in two ways: 1) referring the totality to the thing loved and thus God must be loved totally in the sense that man is bound to love everything that belongs to God; 2) referring the totality to those who love and thus God is to be loved totally in the sense that man is obliged to love God with all his strength, and to order all his resources to the love of God. (cf. II-II q. 27 a. 5)

In this regard, we saw that per s. Thomas is commanded to love God with all our heart, with all soul, with all mind and with all strength, in the sense that there must be nothing in us that is not currently or habitually referred to God. [75]

The same s. Doctor specifies that to live in such charity that God commands us: "... man must first refer everything to God as his own goal ... Secondly, man must submit his intellect to God by believing divinely revealed things ... Thirdly, man must love in God all that he loves and must order all his affections to God's love. ... Fourthly, all our external things, words and actions must be founded in charity. "[76] Furthermore s. Thomas explains that: “… although the perfection of the districts is not possible for us in this life, nevertheless we must strive to reach the greatest possible resemblance to that perfection: and in this consists the perfection to which we are called through the evangelical counsels. ... "[77]

May God lead us to the highest perfection of charity.

d, 1) Charity makes us ready to lose everything and to die rather than sin.

God enlighten us.

The fact that we must love God more than ourselves determines that true charity leads us to prefer any punishment to guilt, that is, it also leads us to prefer the penalty of death to the guilt of sin: "Dicendum, quod contritus tenetur in general velle pati magis quamcumque poenam quam sinning; et hoc ideo quia contritio non potest esse sine caritate, per quam omnia dimittuntur peccata. Ex caritate enim plus homo diligit Deum quam seipsum; peccare autem est facere contra Deum; puniri autem est aliquid pati contra seipsum; unde caritas hoc requirit ut quamlibet poenam homo contritus praeeligat culpae. " (Quodlibet. I, 9)

The famous moral theologian Prummer (Prummer "Manual theologiae moralis", Herder, 1961, v. I, p. 399) says that charity must be "appretiative" summa, that is, we must esteem God more than any creature so that we must be ready to lose the whole world (ie ourselves, our family, our friends etc.… in short, all of creation!) rather than sinning; in this sense it is affirmed that we must love God above all… ..it is in fact a terrible insult that we do to God to place any creature before Him, who is infinite. On the other hand, it is not necessary that we love God in the highest degree as regards the intensity of the act of will or as regards the sensitive perception of such love, in fact many created objects are perceived by us as closer and felt by us. in a more lively way than God. Therefore man does not sin if he feels more vividly the love for relatives, friends etc. that love for God, provided that, however, he is always ready to lose everything rather than sin. " We find the same affirmed in Aertnys-Damen's text “Theologia Moralis”, Marietti, 1956, v. I, p. 328s. The moralist HB Merkelbach in “Summa Theologiae Moralis” Desclée de Brouwer, Brugis - Belgica 1959, t.1, p. 693 states: “By the order of charity God is simply to be loved above all things. Essential for charity is that we love God above all things… in an objective way… and also in an appreciative way so that we prefer to lose everything and suffer everything rather than losing God through grave sin. In fact, the infinite Good is to be loved more than any creature… the cause for which we love ourselves and our neighbor is God, therefore, we must love God more than ourselves and our neighbor. ”(My translation) In this line s. Alfonso says in the act of preparation for death “I affirm that I love you above all things, because you are an infinite good; and because I love you, I repent above all evil of all the offenses I have done to you, and I propose to die first than to offend you more. Please take my life away rather than allow me to lose you with another sin. "[78]   Let's remember what the Tridentine Catechism says: “…. as God is the first of the goods to be loved, so sin is the first and greatest of the evils to hate. Therefore, the same reason that obliges us to recognize that God is to be loved supremely also obliges us to bring utmost hatred to sin. Now, that the love of God must take precedence over everything else, so that it is not lawful to sin not even to keep life, these words of the Lord show openly: "Whoever loves his father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me "(Mt 10,37); "Whoever wants to save his life will lose it" (Mt 16,25:8,35; Mk XNUMX:XNUMX).[79]  Charity makes us ready to lose everything and to give our life rather than sin and above all rather than sin gravely.

The doctrine of the Church is very clear on this point and in a certain way we have seen it: the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in n. 2072: “Since the ten commandments reveal the fundamental duties of man towards God and towards his neighbor, in their essential content they reveal grave obligations. They are essentially immutable and oblige always and everywhere. Nobody could dispense from them. The ten commandments are engraved by God in the heart of the human being. " The ten commandments reveal, in their essential content, grave obligations and no one can dispense himself or others from them; "Charity necessarily implies respect for the commandments even in the most serious circumstances" (VS, n. 91) and therefore makes us ready to give our life and to lose everything rather than violating the divine commandments.

St. Ignatius of Loyola, founder of the Jesuits, the Order to which Pope Francis belonged, wrote about this: "The first way of humility is necessary for eternal salvation and consists in lowering myself and humiliating myself as much as possible, because I obey the law of God our Lord in everything; in such a way that, even if I were made lord of all created things, or even at the cost of my earthly life, I never decide to transgress any divine or human commandment that obliges me under pain of mortal sin. "[80]

Charity leads us not to sin, it leads us to prefer death to grave sin, ardent charity leads us to be ready to give our life also in order not to fall into venial sin, yes. Ignatius of Loyola significantly writes in the "Spiritual Exercises":

"[166] The second way of humility is more perfect and consists in this, that I find myself in a disposition such that I do not want or become attached to having wealth rather than poverty, to seek honor rather than dishonor, to to desire a long life rather than a short life, as long as the service of God our Lord and the salvation of my soul are equal; and also that he never decides to commit a venial sin, not even in exchange for all created things or at the cost of losing his life. "[81]

d, 2) Order of charity and martyrdom.

Sanctifying grace and therefore charity, that is, divine life in us, leads us never to transgress the holy Law of God and to be ready to die rather than to perform acts against this Law, martyrs are a clear example of this charity.

The history of the Church presents wonderful testimonies of saints who, moved by charity, observed the Law to the point of giving their life for this and preferred death to sin: "The Church offers the example of numerous saints, who have witnessed and defended moral truth to the point of martyrdom or preferred death to a single mortal sin. By elevating them to the honor of the altars, the Church has canonized their testimony and declared their judgment true, according to which the love of God necessarily implies respect for his commandments, even in the most serious circumstances, and the refusal to betray them, even with the intention to save his life. " (VS, n.91) The love of God, that is, charity, necessarily implies respect for the commandments even in the most serious circumstances and therefore implies, according to divine wisdom, the absolute refusal to violate these commandments even with the intention of save our life or that of other people! We already said it above: we cannot put the divine commandments “under our feet” to save a family or for other “good” reasons!

“The observance of God's law, in certain situations, can be difficult, very difficult: however, it is never impossible. This is a constant teaching of the Church's tradition ... "(VS, n. 102,), Veritatis Splendor quotes here the text of the Council of Trent: for which God does not command the impossible, the commandments, therefore, are not impossible, therefore no one, although justified, must consider himself free from the commandments.[82]

The observance of the commandments becomes particularly difficult when for it we risk our life or others risk it because of us but "... charity necessarily implies respect for the commandments even in the most serious circumstances" (VS n. 91) and leads us to always observe the holy commandments and therefore leads us not to sin.

Charity makes us observe the divine commandments even when such observance becomes dangerous for us or for others; therefore charity makes us ready for martyrdom. Veritatis Splendor says: “The relationship between faith and morality shines in all its splendor in the unconditional respect that is due to the irrepressible demands of the personal dignity of every man, to those requirements defended by moral norms which prohibit intrinsically evil acts without exception. " (VS, n. 90) This unconditional respect remains firm and immutable even in the face of death.

The Bible offers us various examples of this also in the Ancient Covenant (VS n. 91) think of the case of Susanna (Dn. 13) or the 7 Maccabean brothers and their mother (2 Mac. 7)

The precursor of Christ, St. John the Baptist, as the Gospel clearly says: "... refusing to keep silent about the law of the Lord and to compromise with evil," he sacrificed his life for truth and justice "(Missale Romanum, In Passione S. Ioannis Baptistae, Collecta ) and was thus a precursor of the Messiah even in martyrdom (cf Mk 6,17: 29-91). " (VS no. XNUMX)

In the New Covenant we find numerous testimonies of this absolute fidelity to the holy law of God and therefore to Christ (cf. VS n. 91)

In Amoris Laetitia, of course, there is no mention of fidelity to the divine law to the point of martyrdom, nor of charity that makes us ready for martyrdom rather than committing homosexual or adulterous acts ...

God enlighten us!

d, 3) Clarification: charity does not make us sin not even to avoid even very serious damage to our neighbor!

The testimony of the martyrs is very clear: God is to be loved above all and we cannot violate the commandments for any reason, neither for our "good" nor for the "good" of others!

We have seen that negative commandments are obligatory at all times and in all circumstances[83] and that charity leads us to always observe the commandments, therefore it never leads us to sin, not even for our "good" or that of others.

In an interesting passage taken from the works of s. Catherine we read, in line with what has been said so far, that true charity does not make us sin not even to snatch the whole world from hell! “The light of discretion, which comes out of charity as told you, gives to the next ordered love, that is, with ordered charity, which does not harm itself in order to benefit the neighbor. That if only one sin were to make a living out of the whole world of hell or to use a great virtue, it would not be charity ordered with discretion, it would also be indiscreet, because it is not permitted to make a great virtue or benefit to one's neighbor through sin. … It would not be a fitting thing that to save the creatures, who are finished and created by me, I was offended who know 'Infinite good: only that fault would be more serious, and great, than it would not be the fruit that it would do for that fault. Yes, what guilt of sin you must not do in any way: true charity is known to her because she carries with her the light of holy discretion. "[84] True charity is ordered and does not make us commit sin even to avoid the most terrible harm to our neighbor; as you have just heard from the text of St. Charity Catherine does not make us sin even in the event that with such a sin we could pull the damned out of hell…. let alone if it is permissible to commit adultery to save a family.

Charity makes us love God above all, therefore above even children, therefore it makes us radically oppose sin, it makes us hate it, and makes us make the necessary decisions not to commit it even if this should certainly determine damage to children and / or to us or anyone else.

We will resume and deepen later, in this chapter, the theme of the order of charity in particular with regard to ourselves and the considerations that we will make will help us to introduce us to the chapter concerning the errors of Pope Francis on the death penalty.

God enlighten us better and better.

5) The Law of Charity.

a) Fundamental clarifications on the law and in particular on the natural law and on the revealed law.

The law, according to St. Thomas, is an ordination (ordinatio) of reason for the common good, promulgated by whoever has the care of a community. The word ordination seems to me to better express what s says. Thomas as taken, in particular, in the sense of giving order, order, regular disposition[85] The law gives order, rules.

Leo XIII affirmed: “Therefore the law is a guide to man in action, and with rewards and punishments it induces him to do well and distances him from sin. . "[86]

There are various forms of law

St. Thomas states that there are various types of laws: the eternal law, the natural law, the human law and the positive divine law or revealed law.

Therefore, first of all there is an eternal law.

Says s. Thomas: “Manifestum est autem, supposito quod mundus divina providentia regatur, ut in primo habitum est, quod tota communitas universi gubernatur ratione divina. Et ideo ipsa ratio gubernationis rerum in Deo sicut in principe universitatis existens, legis habet rationem. Et quia divina ratio nihil concipit ex tempore, sed habet aeternum conceptum, ut dicitur Prov. VIII; inde est quod huiusmodi legem oportet dicere aeternam. ”(I-II q. 91 a.1) The world is governed by divine Providence and the whole universe is governed by divine rule and the same divine rule of government, in God, has the right of law and this rule is eternal; God himself is eternal law (I-II q. 93 a.4 in c.)

The Eternal Law is participated on various levels.

Explain s. Thomas that: the Eternal Law is shared through the natural law according to the proportion of human nature, but man needs to be guided in a higher way towards the ultimate supernatural end. And so God has added a positive divine law, by which the eternal law is partaken in a higher way than the natural law. (cfr. I-II q. 91 a. 4 ad 1m)

Therefore the highest level of participation in the Eternal Law occurs with the positive divine law, a lower level of participation in it occurs with the Natural Law. The natural law is, as we shall see better, a participation of the eternal law in the rational creature.

St. Thomas affirmed that human laws are truly laws and rules insofar as they in turn are regulated by right reason and therefore by God who is the eternal Law. From God who is Eternal Law, supreme Rule, human law draws strength in this line. To the extent that human laws deviate from reason and therefore from the Eternal Law, they are unjust, they are rather a form of violence and therefore do not realize the concept of law.[87] More precisely, it says yes. Thomas regarding human laws: "Et istae particulares dispositiones adinventae secundum rationem humanam, dicuntur leges humanae, servatis aliis conditionibus quae pertinent ad rationem legis, ut supra dictum est." (I-II q. 91 a. 3) Human laws are particular dispositions, dictates of reason, which are reached starting from the precepts of the natural law, observing the other conditions that are required to have a law. Right human laws also participate in the Eternal Law.

a, 1) The natural law.

Creation appears as the act by which God by creating and unifying the universe gives him a law (cf. Ps 148,5-6) and by creating man God also gives him a law, a rule of conduct that applies to all men: obedience to the Creator (Gen. 2,16f); the obedience of creatures to the law of God is a model for human beings to obey as well.

In line with what we have just seen, the Catechism affirms that the natural law: “It has as its pivot the aspiration and submission to God, source and judge of all good, and also the sense of the other as equal to himself. "(Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1955)

In the covenant established with Noah, God gives humanity a law involving respect for life.[88]

The gift of the Law on Sinai implies fundamental ethical precepts but these ethical behaviors are also valid for other peoples, in fact God asks foreign nations to account (Am 1-2) who evidently violate the law that God has given them. [89]

Furthermore, the Bible also contains a literature of wisdom that develops the conviction that there is a correct, "wise" way of doing things and leading life, that is, there is a natural Law, of such wisdom that comes from God man is made a participant in various ways. This participation is a gift from God, which we must ask for in prayer: and it is also the fruit of a careful study of nature and human customs. [90]

St. Paul affirms the existence of the natural law (Rom 1,19-20), in their hearts the pagans have this law, established by God (Rom 2,14-15)

What has just been said makes us understand that the natural law is, in various ways, very present in all of Scripture.

Let us ask ourselves: what is the natural law? St. Thomas explains it in these terms “…. Inter cetera autem rationalis creature excellentiori quodam modo divinae providentiae subiacet, inquantum et ipsa fit providentiae particeps, sibi ipsi et aliis providens. Unde et in ipsa participatur ratio aeterna, per quam habet naturalem inclinationem ad debitum actum et finem. Et talis participatio legis aeternae in rationali creature lex naturalis dicitur. … Unde patet quod lex naturalis nihil aliud est quam participatio legis aeternae in rationali creature. ”(I-II q.91 a.2) The natural law is therefore a participation of the eternal Law in the rational creature; it is a certain what impression of the divine light in us by which we distinguish what is good and what is evil.

The doctrine of the Church speaks extensively of the natural law, see, in particular, in the text of Denzinger - Hünermann [91] the nos. 4763, 3247,3272, 3780,3956, 4316, 4580, 2302,3131, 3132, 3133, 3150, 3152, 3165, 3170, 3248, 3265, 3270, 4315, 3970, 4242 etc.

VS states: “Only God can answer the question about the good, because He is the Good. But God has already given an answer to this question: he did so by creating man and ordering him with wisdom and love for his purpose, by means of the law inscribed in his heart (cf. Rom 2,15:XNUMX), the "natural law. ". This "is none other than the light of intelligence infused in us by God. Thanks to it we know what must be done and what must be avoided. God gave this light and this law in creation ».[92]"(VS no. 12)

And the same encyclical brightly specified: "The Church has often referred to the Thomistic doctrine of natural law, taking it into her own moral teaching." (VS n. 44) St. Thomas pray for us, and make us strong in defending the holy truth.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks very profoundly of the natural law in nos. 1954ss, among other things the text of s. Tommaso just seen.[93]

St. Thomas also says that: "... the light of natural reason with which we distinguish good from evil, which belongs to the natural law, is nothing other than a penetration into us of divine light". (I-II, q . 91, a. 2.)

In VS we also read that natural law is so called because it is promulgated by the reason proper to human nature (cf. VS n. 43; Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1955).

VS herself also reports an illuminating affirmation of herself. Thomas for whom the natural law is a participation of the eternal law, that is, of the eternal reason, in the rational creature (cf. I-II, q. 91, a.2.; VS n. 43)

In a passage from an encyclical letter of Leo XIII we read: “Natural law is inscribed and engraved in the soul of all individual men; in fact, it is human reason which imposes good action and prohibits sin. … This prescription of human reason, however, cannot have the force of law, if it is not the voice and interpreter of a higher reason, to which our spirit and our freedom must be subjected ”.[94] Taking up some affirmations of this encyclical letter of Pope Leo XIII, Veritatis Splendor affirms: "... it follows that the law of nature is the same eternal law, inherent in those who have use of reason, and for it incline to action and due end: it is the same eternal reason of God the creator and ruler of the entire universe. " [95]

The Second Vatican Council clearly speaks of natural law when it states: “Where citizens are oppressed by a public authority that goes beyond its competence, they do not reject what is objectively required by the common good; however, it is legitimate to defend one's rights and those of fellow citizens against abuses of authority, in compliance with the limits dictated by natural law and the Gospel. "[96]

Further, always in the same conciliar document we read: “The Church, by virtue of her divine mission, preaches the Gospel and bestows the treasures of grace to all peoples. You thus contribute to strengthening peace in every part of the world, placing the knowledge of divine and natural law as a solid foundation of fraternal solidarity between men and between nations. "[97]

St. Paul VI affirmed: "... even the natural law is an expression of God's will, the faithful fulfillment of it is equally necessary for the eternal salvation of men."[98]

In the Catechism we read "... The natural law indicates the first and essential norms that regulate the moral life." (Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1955)

God make us strong in the Truth.

Natural law is universal and extends to all men (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1956)

As we said before, reporting the affirmations of s. Thomas, in the diversity of cultures, the natural law imposes common principles on men. (see Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1956)

Veritatis Splendor also speaks effectively of the universality of the natural law, in fact it states: “51. The alleged conflict between freedom and nature also affects the interpretation of some specific aspects of natural law, especially its universality and immutability. … ”(VS n.51) With regard to the universality of these norms, Veritatis Splendor states:“ It is precisely thanks to this "truth" that natural law implies universality. … The natural law is universal in its precepts and its authority extends to all men. ... "(VS no.51)

Natural law is therefore universal but also, as we shall see better below, immutable. With regard to the immutability of the natural law, it is first of all necessary to consider carefully what Veritatis Splendor affirms: "The great sensitivity that contemporary man testifies to historicity and culture leads some to doubt the immutability of the natural law itself ..." (Veritatis Splendor n.53) We should ask ourselves whether certain statements of Amoris Laetitia and certain openings of his have something to do with certain doubts about the immutability of this Law. Faced with these doubts, however, Veritatis Splendor specifies that: "Questioning the permanent structural elements of man, also connected with the body dimension itself, would not only be in conflict with common experience, but would make the reference that Jesus did at the "beginning", precisely where the social and cultural context of the time had deformed the original meaning and role of some moral norms (cf. Mt 19,1: 9-53). "(VS n.XNUMX)

As the Second Vatican Council says: “the Church affirms that underneath all the changes there are many things that do not change; they find their ultimate foundation in Christ, who is always the same: yesterday, today and for centuries ".[99] The immutability of the natural law finds its foundation in Christ and in his Incarnation. (see VS no 53)

It is interesting to note that the Catechism of the Catholic Church rightly states: the natural law is immutable (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1958); the reference it offers, also cited by VS in n. 53 for this statement is n. 10 of Gaudium et spes which in reality, as seen, does not speak directly of immutable natural law. The N. 79 of this conciliar document states: “Faced with this state of degradation of humanity, the Council intends first of all to recall the immutable value of the natural law of peoples and its universal principles. "[100]

Clearly speaking of the immutability of Natural Law is the document: "Human Person" of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 22.1.1975[101], which has a part dedicated to the "immutable natural laws"

and in this part we read: "... divine revelation and, in its proper order, philosophical wisdom, highlighting the authentic needs of humanity, therefore necessarily manifest the existence of immutable laws, inscribed in the constitutive elements of human nature and which manifest themselves identical in all beings, endowed with reason. "[102]

There are therefore immutable natural laws inscribed in human nature, which the Church has recognized as such: "The Church, throughout its history, has constantly considered a certain number of precepts of the natural law as having absolute and immutable value, and has seen in their transgression a contradiction with the doctrine and spirit of the gospel. "[103]

Regarding the immutability of some norms of the natural law, Veritatis Splendor says, more directly, taking up the document cited above: "It is right and good, always and for everyone, to serve God, to render him the due worship and to honor parents according to truth. . Such positive precepts, which prescribe to perform certain actions and to cultivate certain attitudes, are universally binding; they are immutable; [104]... These universal and permanent laws correspond to knowledge of practical reason and are applied to particular acts through the judgment of conscience. " (VS n.52) This universality and immutability of the natural law derives from the fact that it comes from God, who is immutable Truth; s. Augustine in fact affirmed that the Light that is God does not totally abandon even the iniquitous: “From this it derives in fact that even the iniquitous think of eternity and rightly take up, rightly praise many things, in the conduct of men. … Where then are these rules inscribed, if not in the book of that light which is called truth? Hence, therefore, every just law is dictated and it is transferred to the heart of the man who works justice, not emigrating in him, but almost imprinting itself on him, as the image passes from the ring into the wax, but without abandoning the ring".[105] God, who is Eternal Law, Immutable makes himself known to man and makes him know the immutable truths about acting, he makes him know the good to do and the evil to flee and this is accomplished above all through the natural law.

In the face of the clear affirmations of the Church, among Christians, however, one can find those who reject the traditional doctrine on the natural law, on the universality and on the permanent validity of its precepts. (see VS no. 4)

In this regard the Catechism affirms in n. 1960 " The precepts of the natural law are not perceived by everyone with clarity and immediacy. In the current situation, grace and Revelation are necessary for sinful man so that religious and moral truths can be known "by all and without difficulty, with firm certainty and without any mixture of error".[106] "I emphasize: grace and Revelation are necessary for sinful man so that religious and moral truths can be known" by everyone and without difficulty, with firm certainty and without any mixture of error ". Although there is the natural law we need grace and revelation and therefore the divine law revealed!

In this line the VS at n. 36 reiterates: “… the dependence of human reason on divine Wisdom and the necessity, in the present state of fallen nature, as well as the actual reality of divine revelation for the knowledge of moral truths also of the natural order, (Cf Pius XII, Lett. enc. Humani generis (12 August 1950): AAS 42 (1950), 561-562) "(VS n. 36) As can be seen, even though there is already the natural law, it is very clear to the Church that divine revelation is also necessary for to know the moral truths of the natural order.

The text of Humani Generis quoted in these passages says more precisely: “In reaching these truths, the human intellect encounters obstacles of the imagination, both due to the bad passions deriving from original sin. It happens that men in these things willingly persuade themselves that it is false, or at least doubtful, what they "do not want to be true". For these reasons it must be said that divine revelation is morally necessary so that those truths which in religious and moral matters are not in themselves unattainable can be known to everyone with ease, with firm certainty and without any error. (Conc. Vat. DB 1876, Const. "De fide Cath.", Chap. II, De revelatione). "[107]

Divine revelation is morally necessary so that those truths which in religious and moral matters are not in themselves unattainable can be known to everyone with ease, with firm certainty and without any error.

In its main precepts, the natural law is set out in the Decalogue (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1955)

a, 2) The revealed divine law and in particular the ancient law.

The Revelation we are talking about contains another Law that God has given us (cfr. VS n. 12)

Says s. Thomas "Respondeo dicendum quod praeter legem naturalem et legem humanam, necessarium fuit ad directionem humanae vitae habere legem divinam." (I-II q. 91 a. 4) It was necessary that in addition to the natural law and the human law, and in addition to the eternal law, there was a divine law, revealed.

Catholic doctrine distinguishes very well the natural moral law from the positive divine law which is indicated with the terms of ancient law and new or evangelical law; we will talk about these last two laws Read in the next pages.

Wanting to go deeper into this reality which is the revealed Law we must say with the Pontifical Biblical Commission[108]  that in Scripture what is fundamental is the initiative of God, the gift of God, morality is rooted in the gifts of the Creator to the creature and in particular in the gift of the covenant which is above all a manifestation of God's plan and a gift of God.[109]

So for the Bible, morality comes after the experience that God makes man do as a purely gratuitous gift. Starting from this experience, the Law itself, an integral part of the covenant process, is a gift of God. The Law "... is not a juridical notion based on behaviors and attitudes, but a theological concept, which the Bible itself it makes the most of the term "path" (derek in Hebrew, hodos in Greek): a proposed path. "[110]

God called Israel to be his People, he chose it freely, it belongs to him and must be guided by him, God guides Israel on a path that Israel must travel, as can be seen very clearly in the Exodus.

God presents Israel as a "people of God" (Ex. 3, 7.8) The idea of ​​the people of God has an ethnic dimension and a religious dimension, this idea also involves "... three particular characteristics, which are the calling, the belonging , the path."[111]

The call emerges clearly from this passage from Deuteronomy: "The Lord has bound himself to you and has chosen you, not because you are more numerous than all other peoples - you are in fact the least of all peoples - but because the Lord he loves and because he wanted to keep the oath he swore to your fathers: the Lord brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you by freeing you from the servile condition, from the hand of Pharaoh, king of Egypt. " (Deuteronomy 7, 7-8)

Membership also emerges from this text of Deuteronomy: “You are children to the Lord, your God: you will not make incisions and you will not shave between the eyes for a dead man. You are in fact a people consecrated to the Lord, your God, and the Lord has chosen you to be his particular people among all the peoples who are on earth. "(Deut. 14,1: XNUMXs)

The journey of the People of God is clearly seen in the Exodus but continues throughout Scripture, becoming the journey of the New People of God, the Church; it is a journey in this world and it is a journey towards Heaven. The Law itself is precisely a "path" (derek in Hebrew, hodos in Greek): a path proposed by God.

The People of God is the recipient and counterpart of a Covenant with God, which must be understood as: "... personal disposition, commitment, obligation, assurance, promise, which basically originates from a free and unilateral initiative of God, to which it is eventually connected even an oath ".[112]

The covenant is essentially characterized by a grace (the Lord commits himself), that is, by the gift that God makes of himself and by the Law, that is, by the gift that God makes to man of an ethical-cultual path that allows man to enter and to remain in covenant with God himself.[113]

The covenant between God and his people is a covenant between unequal contractors. Similarly to the treaties of vassalage, in which the sovereign commits himself to the vassal and commits the vassal to himself, God commits himself and commits the people. “This double movement is expressed, in the theological field, through two main themes: Grace (the LORD commits himself) and the Law (the LORD commits the people who become his" property ": Ex 19,5: 6-XNUMX). In this theological framework, grace can be defined as the gift (unconditional, in certain texts) that God makes of himself. And the Law as the gift that God gives to the collective man, of a means, of a way, of an ethical-cult "path" ('derek') that allows man to enter and remain "in a situation of covenant ""[114].

Similarly to the stipulations of the covenant between unequal contractors in which the lord is the only one who expresses himself while the vassal, in this stage, remains silent, the Lord in the covenant is the only one who expresses himself.[115]

The covenant between God and his people implies that the people, as mentioned, observe the Law and therefore love God, as the Law commands. In particular, it is necessary to cite the famous texts, especially from Deuteronomy which present love as commanded by God (Deut. 6,5; 10,12; 11,13.22; 19,9; 30,20; Jos. 23,11) as necessary to please God (Dt. 10,12; 11,13.22; 19,9; 30,20; Josh. 23,11) as the end of a series of tests allowed by God (Dt. 13,4) and as a gift of God (Dt. 30,6)

If God, as we have seen, is presented as the Bridegroom of the people of God, it is obvious that the bride, that is precisely the people, must love God; this love is united with the observance of the covenant with God and therefore of the Law that He gives (Sir. 2, 15-17), the Law itself commands the love of God, as seen, and God gives this love to man (Dt. 30,6).

God commands man to love Him and this love implies the observance of the Law; man must love God with all of himself: with all his heart, mind, etc. this precisely implies observance of what God wills, observance of the Law given by God out of love.

The divine law is not simply observed but must be loved, as a gift of love from God for the true good of man (Ps. 119)

a.3) The Law of charity.

There are 2 Laws revealed: the Ancient, which we have just examined, and the New.

The new law is also called the Law of Charity.

To understand the Law of charity well, we must first of all note that "the person of Jesus, his work and his destiny in the New Testament is decisive and fundamental for the relationship between God and the people of Israel and all men." [116]

“The central position of Jesus for man's relationship with God has as a consequence his central position for the moral life. He represents in his person not only the kingdom of God and the new covenant but also the Law, because he is led in the most perfect way by the will of his Father (cf. Mt 26,39.42), up to the maximum manifestation of his love. , at the shedding of his blood. We must therefore act in his Spirit and follow his example to walk the way of God. "[117]

The text just quoted[118] in the part in which it deals with the moral dimension of the doctrine of the New Testament it will be the basis for my reflections which I will carry out below, in this paragraph. The law of charity is therefore Christ himself and is life in his Spirit; it has Jesus as its guide who invites us to follow him (Mt 4,18: 22-1,16; Mk 20: 5,1-11; Lk 1,35: 51-XNUMX; Jn XNUMX: XNUMX-XNUMX). At the basis of this Law of charity for us is the experience of God's love for each one and the relationship with Christ.

The path traced out and offered to us by Jesus is not an authoritarian norm imposed from the outside but a communion of life (Mt 11,28: 30-10,45) with him: Jesus walks this path with us and calls us to follow his example. With Jesus we must be willing to serve: "In fact, the Son of man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many" (Mk XNUMX:XNUMX) and this service reaches the point of walking with him on the way of the cross and give our life with him.

“If anyone wants to come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross and follow me” (Mk 8,34:XNUMX). It is a question of participating also in his sufferings and in his death.

This New Law of love implies our faith and therefore our total acceptance of him: of his teaching and example; in fact for us everything he does is also normative: "I have given you an example" (Jn 13,15:15,12), "that you love yourselves ... as I have loved you" (Jn XNUMX:XNUMX).

Faith is a great novelty that Christ asks of us from him and for which we leave ourselves and "come" to him; faith is the foundation of charity and the latter is the fruit of the former (Jn 15,8: XNUMX).

This Law of charity is lived in the grace that makes the disciple just and perseveres.

The Law of charity causes sin to die: "We, who have already died to sin, how will we still be able to live in it?" (Rom 6,2). Death to sin is a participation in the death of Christ. The assimilation of the itinerary of believers to that of Christ is also assimilation of his death to sin. All this implies assimilation to him in his relationship with the Holy Spirit and therefore Trinitarian indwelling, the disciple becomes the temple of God in Christ. The Holy Spirit leads us precisely to imitate Christ: "Become my imitators as I am of Christ" ( 1 Cor 11,1: 2,5). "Have the same sentiments among yourselves as Christ Jesus!" (Phil. 6,2) The Holy Spirit makes us die with Christ to sin (Rm XNUMX)

The Holy Spirit and the charity that He gives us pushes us to follow Christ in death to sin and in the complete giving of our life for the life of the world "Because the love of Christ impels us, to the thought that one died for all and so everyone died. And he died for everyone, so that those who live may no longer live for themselves, but for him who died and rose again for them "(2 Cor 5,14: 15-2,20). Likewise the Holy Spirit makes Christ live in us: “It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. This life, which I live in the body, I live in the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself up for me "(Gal 5,2:3,17). The Holy Spirit makes us walk in charity in the exemplary footsteps of Christ "Walk in charity, in the way that Christ also loved us and gave himself up for us, offering himself to God as a sacrifice pleasing to him" (Eph 4,15: 16; cf. Eph 12,2:1; 5,21:1,10-5,10). The Law of charity is therefore fulfilled under the interior guidance of God, of the Trinity, and in particular under the guidance of the Consoler who is Himself Charity, in the Spirit we are called to discern in all our decisions (Rom 5,25: 8,14), to discern it means distinguishing what is best and perfect in every circumstance (cf. XNUMX Thes XNUMX:XNUMX; Phil XNUMX:XNUMX; Eph XNUMX:XNUMX) so that we can always grow in perfect imitation of Christ (cf. Gal XNUMX:XNUMX; Rom XNUMX, XNUMX)

The Holy Spirit guides us to be a sacrifice of praise in the sacrifice of Christ: “Through him we continually offer God a sacrifice of praise: this is the fruit of lips that praise his name. Do not forget to do good and to share your goods, because the Lord is pleased with these sacrifices "(13,15: 16-2,2). The Law of charity is obviously a sacrificial law in Christ the Sacrifice and therefore is closely linked to the Eucharist which makes us participate in such a Sacrifice and is itself this Sacrifice. The Eucharist transforms men into Christ, as the sound doctrine teaches, it assimilates us to him and sanctifies us in the most complete way. Through "eating the flesh of Jesus" and "drinking his blood" we are assimilated in the highest way to the One who is the same Law of charity, like Christ we must therefore love in particular those with whom we feed on Him and with them we must to be unanimous (Phil. 8,9) precisely in that we are one in Christ and we have only one Holy Spirit. Through the Eucharist, Christ communicates his Spirit in fullness (cf. Rom 1,19: 5,25; Phil XNUMX:XNUMX) so that we live and walk in this Spirit: "If we live by the Spirit, we also walk according to the Spirit" (Gal XNUMX:XNUMX). ).[119]

a, 4) St. Thomas speaks to us of the law of charity.

St. Thomas specifies that according to Aristotle everything is what is principal in it; in the New Testament the grace of the Holy Spirit is principal; therefore the New Law is principally the same grace of the Holy Spirit (cf. Summa Theologiae, I-II, q. 106, a. 1).

St. Thomas, however, calls the New Law, the Law of Charity (cf. St. Thomas Aquinas, “Collationes in decem praeceptis”, proemio) and precisely in the aforementioned proem s. Thomas, after having said he spoke of the fruits of the Law of Love, makes it clear that this Law is charity itself and such fruits are the fruits of charity, in fact he first states: "Sed sciendum quod haec lex, scilicet divini amoris, quatuor efficit in homine valde desirabilia. " … And then when he explains these effects he says: “Secundum quod facit caritas, est divinorum mandatorum observantia. … Tertium quod facit caritas, est, quia est praesidium contra adversa. … Et sic patent quatuor quae in nobis efficit caritas. Sed praeter illa, quaedam alia efficit quae praetermittenda non sunt. "" Collationes in decem praeceptis "(St. Thomas Aquinas," Collationes in decem praeceptis ", proemio) The New Law is therefore, for s. Thomas charity, as well as grace!

St. Anthony of Padua says practically the same thing when he affirms that from the mouth of the prelate: "... the subjects will seek the law, that is, charity, of which the Apostle says:" Bear one another's burdens, and thus you will fulfill the the law of Christ ”(Gal 6,2), that is, his precept of charity; In fact, Christ only out of love carried the weight of our sins on the cross in his body. The law is charity, which subjects "seek outside" (ex quirunt), that is, they seek first of all in works, in order to receive it more willingly and more fruitfully from the very mouth of the prelate: because Jesus "first began to do and then to teach "(Acts 1,1: XNUMX)."[120]

That this New Law is charity in particular means what we will say.

1) It means that it implies a radical break with mortal sin; in fact grave sin excludes charity from the soul (cf. IIª-IIae q. 24 a. 12 co.) In the Commentary on the Ten Commandments s. Thomas states: “Sed ad hoc quod istud praeceptum dilectionis possit perfecte impleri, quatuor requiruntur…. Quartum est omnimoda peccatorum vitatio. Nullus enim potest diligere Deum in sin existens. Matth. VI, 24: non potestis Deo serve et mammonae. Unde si in sin existis, Deum non diligis. Sed ille diligebat qui dicebat, Jesse. XXXVIII, 3: memento quomodo ambulaverim coram te in veritate et in corde perfecto. Praeterea dicebat Elias, III Reg. XVIII, 21: quousque claudicatis in duas partes? Sicut claudicans nunc huc nunc illuc inclinatur; sic et peccator nunc peccat, nunc Deum quaerere nititur. " ("Collationes in decem praeceptis", a. 1) For the precept of charity to be perfectly implemented, four things are needed and the fourth is that sins are absolutely avoided. No one who is in grave sin can love God, so if you are in sin you do not love God. But he who (really) loved God who said to God: remember how I walked before you in truth and with a perfect heart (Isaiah 38).

2) It means that the New Law, as charity, bears the fruits of charity in us: the spiritual life, the observance of the divine commandments (both affirmative and negative), guardianship against adverse realities, guidance towards Heaven, the remission of sins, the illumination of the heart, perfect joy, perfect peace, constitutes man in dignity, makes him not only free but children of God. These fruits are clearly listed by the s. Doctor in the preface of his "Collationes in decem praeceptis".

3) It also means that the New Law, as charity, brings in us all the infused virtues, in fact charity is the form of all the virtues and without charity the infused virtues do not exist (IIª-IIae q. 23 a. 7 s)

b) What is the relationship between the Natural Law and the positive divine Law? Does the positive divine law report only the natural law or something else?

Let's see better now what relationship there is between the Natural Law and the positive divine Law.

Let's say first of all that Revelation recognizes the existence of the natural law as seen, particularly significant are the affirmations of s. Paul in this regard (cf. Rom 1,19: 20-2,14; 15: XNUMX-XNUMX)

We saw above that, in its principal precepts, the natural law is expounded in the Decalogue. (see Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1955)

With regard to the Law of the Gospel and its relationship with the natural law, the Catechism affirms, in particular, in n. 1965 "The new Law or Law of the Gospel is the perfection here below of the divine, natural and revealed Law."

The International Theological Commission has significantly affirmed that, with the New Law: “The very person of Christ, Logos and Wisdom incarnate, thus become the living law, the supreme norm for all Christian ethics. … The grace of the Holy Spirit constitutes the main element of the new Law or Law of the Gospel… The new Law of the Gospel includes, assumes and fulfills the requirements of the natural law. The orientations of the natural law are therefore not external normative instances with respect to the new law. They are a constitutive part of this, even if second and ordered to the main element, which is the grace of Christ (…). Therefore, it is in the light of reason now enlightened by living faith that man better recognizes the orientations of natural law, which show him the way to the full development of his humanity. "[121]

The new Law of the Gospel includes, assumes and fulfills the requirements of the natural law. In the light of reason now illuminated by living faith, man better recognizes the orientations of natural law, which show him the way to the full development of his humanity.

Let us try below to penetrate more deeply into the relationship between the natural law and the revealed law.

The Fathers already affirmed that the Gospel teaches the supernatural life, the divine life and therefore goes beyond philosophy and natural law. [122]

The importance of Revelation and therefore of the divine law, in relation to the natural law and its limits, is emphasized in particular by St. Thomas in an article which is of special importance to us and which begins with a very significant question: it seems that a divine, positive Law was not necessary; to this question the s. Doctor replies that this Law was necessary for 4 reasons: “First… quia homo ordinatur ad finem beatitudinis aeternae, quae excedit proportionem naturalis facultatis humanae,… ideo necessarium fuit ut supra legem naturalem et humanam, dirigeretur etiam ad suum finem lege divinitus data. Secundo… Ut ergo homo absque omni dubitatione scire possit quid ei sit agendum et quid vitandum, necessarium fuit ut in actibus propriis dirigeretur per legem divinitus datam, de qua constat quod could not err. Tertio,… lex humana non potuit cohibere et ordinare sufficienter interiores actus, sed necessarium fuit quod ad hoc superveniret lex divina. Quarto quia, sicut Augustinus dicit, in I de Lib. Arb., Lex humana non potest omnia quae male fiunt, punire vel prohibere,… Ut ergo nullum malum improhibitum et impunitum remaneat, necessarium fuit supervenire legem divinam, per quam omnia peccata prohibentur. "(I-II q. 91 a. 4)

There are therefore four reasons why it was necessary for us that God gave us a divine law in addition to the natural law:

1) because the Ultimate End of man surpasses the natural capacities of man, and it was therefore necessary that he be directed to his end, above the natural and human law, by a law expressly given by God;

2) so that without doubts man can know what to do and what to avoid seeing that given the uncertainty of human judgment, especially regarding contingent and particular facts, regarding human acts, there are different judgments of different people;

3) because man can legislate on what he can judge; but man cannot judge interior acts, and therefore the intervention of a divine law was necessary precisely because human law could not sufficiently order and repress interior acts;

4) because the human law cannot prohibit and punish all evil actions, therefore, in order for no fault to remain without prohibition and punishment, the intervention of divine law was necessary, for which all sins are forbidden and punished. (Cf. I -II q. 91 a. 4)

With regard to reason 1, it should be added that s. Thomas very clearly highlights in his works the necessity, for various reasons, of Revelation, which "contains" the positive divine Law; at the very beginning of the Theological Sum he affirms that man is ordained to God as to his Ultimate End but this End exceeds the capacity of reason, and this End must be known first by men, so that they may direct their intentions and their actions, therefore for the salvation of man it was necessary that through divine revelation things were made known to him, concerning precisely the End, superior to human reason (cf. Iª q. 1 a. 1 co.).

Adds s. Thomas that: the eternal law is shared through the natural law according to the proportion of human nature, but man needs to be guided in a higher way towards the ultimate supernatural end. And so God has added a positive divine law, by which the eternal law is partaken in a higher way than the natural law. (cfr. I-II q. 91 a. 4 ad 1m)

Furthermore, it is necessary to consider that man is inclined to hope for the good in proportion to human nature; to induce man to hope for supernatural good we needed the divine law with his promises, with warnings and precepts, explains s. Thomas in this text: “Ad primum ergo dicendum quod natura sufficienter inclinat ad sperandum bonum naturae humanae proportionatum. Sed ad sperandum supernaturale bonum oportuit hominem induci auctoritate legis divinae, partim quidem promissis, partim autem admonitionibus vel praeceptis. "(IIª-IIae q. 22 a. 1 ad 1)

It also explains s. Thomas that the expression of Gratian's Decree according to which "natural law is what is contained in the Law and in the Gospel" does not mean that what is contained in the Law and in the Gospel is all belonging to natural law since many things taught therein are superior to nature but it means that the things belonging to the natural law are taught to you in a complete way (cf. Iª-IIae q. 94 a. 4 ad 1) As can be clearly seen from this text, the divine law teaches many things superior to nature and teaches also in a complete way what belongs to the natural law.

Interesting to see how the divine law overcomes but also specifies the natural law itself, in particular on the issues that interest us mainly in this book, I think some statements of s. Thomas in the "Sum against the Gentiles", l. III cc. 122s; : “… The positive laws, however, if they are human, must derive from the instinct of nature: as in the demonstrative sciences, every discovery of man begins with principles known by nature. And if they are divine, they not only clarify the instinct of nature, but also make up for the shortcomings of the natural instinct: since the things revealed by God surpass the capacity of natural reason. Now, since in the human species the natural instinct matters that the union of male and female be indivisible, and that it is of one woman with one man, it was necessary that this be ordered by human law. Divine law then, adds a supernatural reason, taken from the fact that marriage means the union of Christ with the Church [Ephes., 5, 32]…. "(Sum against the Gentiles, and UTET, 2013, ebook, book III c. 123).

Regarding reason no. 2 it must be added that Revelation was also necessary for man to be taught about what God can be investigated with reason because the truth about God sought only through reason would have been attainable only by a few, after a long time. and with a mixture of many errors; but on the knowledge of these truths depends the whole salvation of man, which is in God. Therefore, so that the salvation of men would come more conveniently and certainly it was necessary that they be instructed on divine things through divine Revelation (cf. Iª q. 1) a. 1 co.)

St. Thomas also affirmed ": Since there are therefore two series of truths regarding the things of God, the first reachable by reason, while the second transcends any capacity of human ingenuity, it is fitting that both are proposed to man by God as matter faithful. ... divine goodness salutarily provided to command us to keep by faith also the truths that can be known with reason: so that everyone can easily participate in the knowledge of God, without doubts and without errors. Hence the words of Scripture: "Walk no more, as Gentiles do, in the vanity of their thoughts, with darkened intelligence" (Eph., IV, 17,18). And again: "All your children will be taught by the Lord" (Is., LIV, 13). " ("Sum against the Gentiles", and UTET, 2013, ebook, book I c. 4); in this line God through the Decalogue commands us to keep by faith also precepts proper to the natural law so that everyone can accept them easily, without doubts and without errors; in fact the natural law in its principal precepts is exposed in the Decalogue: "... In its principal precepts it is exposed in the Decalogue." (Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1955)

It should also be noted that s. Thomas in the Sum against the Gentiles examines in various chapters of the first book (l. I cc. 4-8) the convenience of the fact that truths reachable with reason are proposed to be held by faith.

The First Vatican Council stated: "It is due to this divine Revelation that all that of divine things is not in itself absolutely inaccessible to human reason, even in the present condition of the human race can easily be known by all with certainty and without any danger. of error. However, not for this reason must Revelation be considered absolutely necessary, but because in the infinite goodness of him God destined man to a supernatural end, that is, to the participation of divine goods, which totally surpass the intelligence of the human mind; in fact, God has prepared for those who love Him those things that no eye saw, no ear ever heard, no human heart knew (1 Cor 2,9: XNUMX). "[123]

In Humani Generis, as we have already seen, we read: "In reaching these truths, the human intellect encounters obstacles ... It happens that men in these things willingly persuade themselves that it is false, or at least doubtful, what they" do not want to be true ". For these reasons it must be said that divine revelation is morally necessary so that those truths which in religious and moral matters are not in themselves unattainable can be known to everyone with ease, with firm certainty and without any error.[124]

We saw above that the Catechism states in n. 1960 " The precepts of the natural law are not perceived by everyone with clarity and immediacy. In the current situation, grace and Revelation are necessary for sinful man so that religious and moral truths can be known "by all and without difficulty, with firm certainty and without any mixture of error".[125]"I emphasize: grace and revelation are necessary for sinful man so that religious and moral truths, even those concerning the natural law, can be known" by everyone and without difficulty, with firm certainty and without any mixture of error ". Although there is the natural law, grace and revelation are needed and therefore the divine law revealed also for everyone to know the natural law well!

Divine revelation is morally necessary so that those truths which in religious and moral matters are not in themselves unattainable can be known to all with ease, with firm certainty and without any error. (Cf. VS n. 36)

St. Irenaeus affirms that God inserted into the soul of men the commands of the natural law from the beginning and with the Decalogue He recalled them to their minds (Saint Irenaeus of Lyons, Adversus haereses, 4, 15, 1: SC 100, 548 (PG 7, 1012).)

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, in this line, in n. 2070 says: “… The Decalogue contains a privileged expression of the« natural law »” The ten commandments teach us life according to true humanity (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 2070) and therefore express the true natural law.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in n. 2071 that the commands of the Decalogue have been revealed while being accessible to reason: sinful humanity needed this revelation to reach a complete and certain knowledge of the requirements of the natural law.

As can be seen, although there is already the natural law, it is very clear to the Church that divine revelation is also necessary to know the moral truths of the natural order, therefore also the natural law.

It still says yes. Thomas: “Et tamen ad ea etiam ad quae naturalis ratio inclinat, sicut sunt actus virtutum moralium, necessarium fuit praecepta legis divinae dari, propter maiorem firmitatem; et praecipue quia naturalis ratio hominis obtenebrata erat for concupiscentias sins. "(IIª-IIae q. 22 a. 1 ad 1)

The divine law was therefore necessary also for the things to which the inclination of natural reason leads, such as the acts of the moral virtues, for greater security and because human reason was darkened by the concupiscence of sin. The divine law therefore also had to confirm the precepts of the natural law to make them clearer and safer for man and to exclude errors regarding them.

The same s. Doctor, in the Theological Sum, a little further on he specifies that: “…. ad legem naturalem pertinent first quidem quaedam praecepta communissima, quae sunt omnibus note, quaedam autem secundaria praecepta magis propria, quae sunt quasi conclusiones propinquae principis. Quantum ergo ad illa principia communia, lex naturalis nullo modo potest a cordibus hominum deleri in universals. Deletur tamen in particulare operabili, secundum quod ratio impeditur apply commune principium ad particulare operabile, propter concupiscentiam vel aliquam aliam passionm, ut supra dictum est. "(I-II q. 94 a. 6)

Therefore, with respect to the common precepts, the natural law cannot be canceled in general from the hearts of men but it is canceled in what can be done in particular (on the basis of the common precepts) since reason is prevented from applying the common principle to the particular act due to lust or some other passion. With respect to the secondary precepts, the natural law can be canceled from the hearts of men because of bad persuasions or evil customs or corrupt habits, and so among some peoples the thefts or unnatural vices were not considered sins. (cf. I-II q. 94 a. 6)

The S. Angelic Doctor further specifies that: "Ad primum ergo dicendum quod lex scripta dicitur esse data ad correctionem legis naturae, vel quia per legem scriptam suppletum est quod legi naturae deerat, vel quia lex naturae in aliquorum cordibus, quantum ad aliqua, corrupta erat intantum ut existimarent esse bona quae naturaliter sunt mala; et talis corruptio correctione indigebat. "(I-II q. 94 a. 5 to 1m)

The written law was given for the correction of the law of nature both to add what the law of nature lacked and because the law of nature had become corrupted in some as well as some norms so that people esteemed good those things that are naturally evil.

As regards precisely the necessity of the divine law written to repair the corruption of the natural law, which had spread in hearts, the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in n. 2071: "To arrive at a complete and certain knowledge of the requirements of the natural law, sinful humanity needed this revelation ..." Sinful humanity in which the natural law was corrupted needed the revealed Law.

St. Thomas in the preface of his "Collationes in decem praeceptis", adds that the natural law was destroyed in man by the law of concupiscence and for this it was necessary that the Law be given to us in the s. Scripture and since the Ancient Law was insufficient, God gave us the Evangelical Law that is the law of charity and grace, the law of Christ and this law must be the rule of human actions; human actions are good and virtuous only insofar as they agree with this law; this law of divine love causes four effects in us: the spiritual life, the observance of the divine commandments, both affirmative and negative, guardianship against adverse realities and guidance towards Heaven.

The external, divine law, moreover, was also necessary with regard to the worship of God both for the obscuring of the natural law due to the sins of men and to give a more express meaning of the grace with which Christ sanctifies men and so it was necessary to determine the things that men must use in the sacraments (cf. IIIª q. 60 a. 5 ad 3)

St. Bonaventure affirms that the obligation of the commandments of the Decalogue radically follows the natural law but as for the exposition follows the Law of Scripture, the full exposition of the commandments of the Decalogue was opportune according to the state of sin due to the darkening of the light. of reason and for the diversion of the will, and since the will was ready for a manifold disorder it had to be linked through multiple commandments. Furthermore, since the inner writing of the heart was obscured and the man, who was endowed with a spiritual mind, had become sensitive and carnal, it was appropriate that the man read externally and hear through the senses of the body those things for which he could regulate according to the rectitude of justice, therefore the exposition and distinction of the commandments belonged to the written law although the obligation belonged to the natural law.[126]

b, 1) Only the positive divine law and in particular the law of charity commands faith, hope and charity.

Only the divine law spoke to us of faith, hope and charity as theological virtues and therefore the command of these theological virtues (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church n.) it is proper to the divine law, in fact it explains s. Thomas: “… Unde oportet quod superaddantur homini divinitus aliqua principia, per quae ita ordinetur ad beatitudinem supernaturalem, sicut per principia naturalia ordinatur ad finem connaturalem, non tamen absque adiutorio divino. Et huiusmodi principia virtutes dicuntur theologicae, tum quia habent Deum pro obiecto, inquantum per eas recte ordinamur in Deum; tum quia a solo Deo nobis infunduntur; tum quia sola divina revelatione, in sacred Scriptura, huiusmodi virtutes traduntur. " (Iª-IIae q. 62 a. 1 co.) Virtue orders man to beatitude but to reach the beatitude that surpasses human nature, that is, to Heaven, the natural principles of man are not enough but it is necessary that they be added to 'man from God of the principles for which he arrives at supernatural beatitude and these principles are the so-called theological virtues both because they have God as their object in so far as we are rightly ordered to God through them and because they are infused into us by God, and because, it should be noted well , by divine Revelation alone, in Holy Scripture, these virtues are transmitted to us.

These virtues are called divine not because they make God virtuous, but because through them we are made virtuous by God, and in order to God, therefore they are not exemplary virtues, but they are "exemplatae" virtues, that is virtues which, for example, have virtues divine which are exemplary. (cfr. Iª-IIae q. 62 a. 1 ad 2m)

From what has been said, therefore, it is evident that the precept of charity, that of faith and hope, are precepts proper to the divine law which made us know these virtues and commands us to live them.

The divine law commands us to live in faith, hope and charity, commands us to adore God and to pray, the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in nos. 2086-88 " The commandment of faith, hope and charity is included in the explicit divine affirmation: "I am the Lord your God". "

Again: “… The first commandment commands us to love God above all (Cf Dt 6,4-5.), And all creatures for him and because of him. …. "(Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 2093)

And further ..: “The acts of faith, hope and charity prescribed by the first commandment are accomplished in prayer. ... "(Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 2098)

As we have seen, the New Law, the Gospel Law is charity in fact s. Thomas states: "Sed sciendum quod haec lex, scilicet divini amoris, quatuor efficit in homine valde desirabilia." … And then when he explains these effects he says: “Secundum quod facit caritas, est divinorum mandatorum observantia. … Tertium quod facit caritas, est, quia est praesidium contra adversa. … Et sic patent quatuor quae in nobis efficit caritas. Sed praeter illa, quaedam alia efficit quae praetermittenda non sunt. " ("Collationes in decem praeceptis" Proemium)

  1. Thomas specifies in this regard that the Gospel Law commands us to love and leads us to live in it, and this Law of love must be the rule of all human actions; what agrees with this Law is truly virtuous, what disagrees with this Law which is charity itself is neither good nor upright. (see "Collationes in decem praeceptis" Proemium)

Charity, that is, the divine law of the gospel, the law of love, if lived, brings many highly desirable effects:

1) the spiritual life;

2) the observance of the commandments, that is, better, the readiness in the observance of the commandments;

3) the transformation, in a certain way, of adversity into useful things;

4) eternal happiness.

5) the remission of sins,

6) enlightenment of the heart,

7) perfect joy and perfect peace,

8) charity constitutes man in great dignity and makes him free and a son of God. (Cf. "Collationes in decem praeceptis", Prooemium)

The Law of charity leads us to love God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength so that: "... in us there is nothing that currently or habitually does not refer to God ...."[127]

Charity is a virtue infused in us by God (IIª-IIae q. 24 a. 12 co.) But also faith and hope are infused virtues, therefore the command of charity, as well as the command of faith and hope, it is a command whereby God calls us to welcome from him the gift of these virtues and to live according to them, believing, hoping and above all loving precisely God himself with all our heart, soul, mind and strength, ensuring that in us there is nothing currently or habitually not referring to God.

c) Can man dispense from the observance of the precepts of the divine law? No.

 

 

Lord, give us light to get to know the thought of St. Thomas and the Church on this point which we have already briefly dealt with.

We have already seen above, in fact, and here we will examine more in depth what they say s. Thomas and various magisterial texts concerning the possibility for a man to dispense himself or others from observing the precepts of the divine law.

Let's say first of all that the dispensation according to its original notion of οἰκονομία indicates the equitable distribution of the common thing to individuals according to the needs of each one (cf. Gn. 43,26-29; Lk. 12,42) (cf. Prummer "Manual theologiae moralis ", Herder 1961, v. I, p. 159s)

The current Code of Canon Law emphasizes that the dispensation is the exemption from the observance of a purely ecclesiastical law (can. 85)

In an important document by s. Paul VI we read: "the Ecumenical Council among others gives the diocesan bishops this faculty: to dispense from the general law of the Church the faithful over whom, according to the norm of law, they exercise their authority, whenever they consider that this benefit their spiritual good; provided that no special reservations have been made in this regard by the supreme authority of the Church (Ibid., n. 8, b.). … By dispensation we mean the dissolution of the law for a special case. The faculty to dispense can be exercised with respect to the precipitating or prohibiting laws, but not the constitutive ones. … By general laws of the Church are meant those merely disciplinary laws, sanctioned by the Supreme Ecclesiastical Authority, to which all those for which they have been enacted are bound everywhere, according to the norm of can. 13 § 1; but we do not mean those divine laws, both natural and positive, from which only the Supreme Pontiff - in cases in which he enjoys vicarious power - can dispense; as happens in the dispensation from ratified and unconsummated marriage, in what concerns the privileium fidei, etc. " [128]

The affirmations of Paul VI are very important because they clearly specify what the dispensation is: dissolution of the law for a special case; furthermore, for our purpose it is of particular interest to reflect on the affirmation of Paul VI that only the Pope can dispense from divine laws, both natural and positive, and only in cases in which he enjoys vicarious power.

As a famous text of canon law explains, the natural or positive divine law is ordinarily totally removed from human power but in limited matters the Church and in particular the Pope can dispense from such laws in the exercise of his authority for a particular power conferred on it by Christ. .[129]

The famous text Wernz Vidal states more precisely: “Romanus Pontifex in legibus divinis sive naturalibus sive positivis absolute latis vere validque dispensare non potest. Praecepta vero iuris naturalis, quae pendent in sua obligatione praeceptiva a priori consensu voluntatis humanae et ab effectiveness illius ad aliquid agendum, possunt a Romano Pontifice vi potestatis suae vicariae a Deo speciatim concessae ex iusta causa dispensari, at non directe ac praecise auferendo obligatione , sed by aliqua remissione, quae fit ex parte materiae (15). Ita vg Romanus Pontifex nomine Dei remittit debitum ortum ex voluntate humana in vow aut solvit vinculum matrimonii rati per contractum matrimonialem effectum, atque exinde consequenter cessat obligatio iuris naturalis. Quare recte monet Suarez De Leg. L. II chap. 14 n. 11, huiusmodi remissiones in rigor non sint dispensationes iuris naturalis, sed potius vocari dispensationes, quia fiant per quamdam remissionem ex potestate iurisdictionis.

When autem lex naturalis obligat ex vi solius rationis in materia independenti a priori consensu voluntatis humanae, etiam Romano Pontifici omnimoda potestas dispensandi est subducta, (cfr. Suarez 1. cn 25). "[130]

The Pope cannot grant dispensation from absolutely proclaimed divine and natural laws.

The precepts of natural and divine law which are bound in their obligation by a previous consent of the human will can be subjected to dispensation by the Roman Pontiff by virtue of his vicarious power but not directly by removing the obligation of natural law but through a certain remission which it is done for part of the matter. In this way the Pope in the name of God remits the debt arising from the human will in the vow or dissolves the bond of marriage ratified through the marriage contract but not yet consummated. Therefore Suarez teaches that remissions of this type are rather dispensations than dispensations of natural law because they occur for a certain remission linked to the place of jurisdiction. On the other hand, when the natural law obliges by the force of reason alone in matters independent of a previous consent of the human will, even the Roman Pontiff is deprived of any power to dispense.

All this, of course, makes us understand that in reality no one, not even the Pope, can dispense himself or others from the precepts of the Decalogue.

The indispensability of the divine commandments clearly expressed in the Decalogue is clearly affirmed by the Catechism of the Catholic Church in n. 2072: “Since the ten commandments reveal the fundamental duties of man towards God and towards his neighbor, in their essential content they reveal grave obligations. They are essentially immutable and oblige always and everywhere. Nobody could dispense from them. The ten commandments are engraved by God in the heart of the human being. " No one can dispense from the Ten Commandments!

He explained s. John Paul II in this line “8. The Roman Pontiff ... has the "sacra potestas" to teach the truth of the Gospel, administer the sacraments and pastorally govern the Church in the name and with the authority of Christ, but this power does not include in itself any power over the divine natural or positive law . "[131]

The Angelic Doctor speaks in various pantry passages.

First of all, St. Thomas reiterates that the dispensation implies a commensurate distribution of things common to the realities that are part of this community, in this way food is dispensed to the family (cf. II-II q. 88 a. 10)

The dispensation of a vote, states s. Thomas, should be understood as the dispensations that are granted in the observance of a human law. Now, the dispensation in human law must be given in the event that a certain law, given in consideration of what is good in most cases, is not good for someone, with this dispensation precisely he is freed from the observance of that law. he for whom such observance is not good. (cf. II-II q. 88 a. 10)

The one who makes a vow, somehow establishes a law for himself, obliging himself to something that in most cases is good and not bad, but in some cases it may happen that this is bad, or is useless or prevents a greater good: which is contrary to the reason why that thing is the subject of a vote, so in this case it is necessary to be able to rule that the vote is not to be observed. And if it is absolutely established that a vote is not to be observed, the vote is dispensed with. If, on the other hand, it is established that some other work is substituted for the object of the vote, there is a commutation. The ruling regarding the dispensation or commutation is left to the Church but this ruling, specifies s. Thomas, does not mean the dispensation from natural or divine law, in fact it determines only what fell under the obligation of human deliberation, which could not examine everything well. (cf. II-II q. 88 a. 10)

The dispensation of the vote, however, does not conflict with the fidelity due to God, because such fidelity does not imply that one does what is evil, or is useless, or is an impediment to a greater good, and the dispensation precisely eliminates these implications and leaves faithfulness to God intact. (cf. II-II q. 88 a. 10)

St. Thomas therefore speaks of the dispensation from particular vows (cf. II-II q. 88 a. 11) and of the dispensation from oaths (cf. II-II q. 89 a. 9)

The precepts of God are precepts of natural law, necessary for themselves to salvation, instead the ecclesiastical laws do not have as their object things which, by indication of the Church, and not for themselves, are necessary for salvation; therefore there may be impediments that determine for someone the dispensation from observing these laws, but there cannot be dispensations from observing the precepts established by God as necessary for salvation. (cfr. IIª-IIae, q. 147 a. 4 ad 1)

St. Thomas, as we anticipated, is in fact very clear in denying that a man can dispense to the Law of God. (Cfr. Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 37 q. 1 a. 4; I-II q. 100 a . 8; Quodlibet 4, a. 8).

In the Sum Theological in particular he says St. Thomas in this regard: “.. Praecepta autem Decalogi continent ipsam intentionem legislatoris, scilicet Dei. … Et ideo praecepta Decalogi sunt omnino indispensabilia. ”(I-II q. 100 a. 8) The precepts of the Decalogue contain the same intention of the Legislator, that is of God, therefore these precepts are absolutely indispensable!

In the article the s. Doctor explains in particular that: God himself would deny himself if he took away the order of justice from him, he being justice itself; for this reason God cannot dispense in such a way that it is lawful for man to deal in disorder with God himself, or not to submit to his order of justice, even in those things for which men are ordained among themselves (cf. I -II q. 100 a. 8 ad 2).

The precepts of the Decalogue are immutable as regards the rule of justice they contain. Compared, on the other hand, to a certain determination for the application to single acts, so that this or that is murder or theft or adultery, there can be changes: in those things that the Lord has instituted, only the authority of God himself is required; instead the authority of men suffices in those things which are entrusted to the jurisdiction of men.[132]

More precisely, examining various passages of his works, St. Thomas states the following.

1) Man can never dispense from the precepts of the Decalogue. Not even the Pope can dispense from divine law or natural law: "Dicendum, quod Papa habet plenitudinem potestatis in Ecclesia, ita scilicet quod quaecumque sunt instituta per Ecclesiam vel Ecclesiae praelatos, sunt dispensabilia a Papa. Haec enim sunt quae dicuntur esse iuris humani, positive vel iuris. About ea vero quae sunt iuris divini vel iuris naturalis, dispense non potest: quia ista habent efficaciam ex institutione divina. Ius autem divinum est quod pertinet ad legem novam vel veterem. "(Quodlibet 4, a. 8). 2) The power of the Pope, to be exercised obviously in the Truth, is only in the sense of specifying what the commandment condemns, therefore to say, Fr. eg, if a certain practice is abortion or not and therefore falls under the condemnation of the fifth commandment or not (cf. I-II q. 100 a. 8 ad 3m)

3) In the case of dispensation from vows and similar human acts which are a kind of law for man, the ruling regarding the dispensation or commutation is left to the Church but this ruling, specifies s. Thomas, does not mean the dispensation from natural or divine law, in fact it determines only what fell under the obligation of human deliberation (cf. II-II q. 88 a. 10)

4) God cannot change the rules of justice that contain the precepts of the Decalogue: “… praecepta ipsa Decalogi, quantum ad rationem iustitiae quam continent, immutabilia sunt. Sed quantum ad aliquam determinationem per applicationem ad singulares actus, ut scilicet hoc vel illud sit homicidium, furtum vel adulterium, aut non, hoc quidem est mutabile, when sola auctoritate divina, in his scilicet quae a solo Deo sunt instituta, sicut in marriage, et in aliis huiusmodi; when etiam auctoritate humana, sicut in his quae sunt commissa hominum iurisdictioni. Quantum enim ad hoc, homines gerunt vicem Dei, non autem quantum ad omnia. "(I-II q. 100 a. 8 ad 3m)

However, God can make a determination for application to individual acts, establishing, with his authority, that this or that is or is not murder or theft or adultery; in this way the Israelites who got things given by the Egyptians on their departure from Egypt did not steal because God established that they were due; similarly Abraham did not allow a murder when God commanded him to kill Isaac because God is the master of life and death and had decided that he be killed. In a similar way Hosea, uniting with his fornicating wife or with the adulterous woman did not sin because that woman was his, she belonged to him according to God's mandate that she is the author of marriage. In the way just said, however, God can in a certain way dispense from the precepts of the second table of the Decalogue, as St. Bernardo, not from those of the first plate.[133]

As s. Thomas “… contra praecepta primae tabulae, quae ordinant immediate in Deum, Deus dispensare non potest; sed contra praecepta secundae tabulae, quae ordinant immediate ad proximum, Deus potest dispensare; non autem homines in his dispense possunt. " (Super Sent., Lib. 1 d. 47 q. 1 a. 4) God cannot dispense from the precepts of the first table of the Decalogue, he can instead dispense, as seen, from the precepts of the second table, but men cannot.

In De Malo in particular s. Thomas states “Quod vero dicitur ad Oseam: accipe tibi mulierem fornicariam, etc., intelligitur secundum modum praecepti; sed praeceptum divinum facit ut non sit peccatum quod aliter esset peccatum. Potest enim Deus, ut Bernardus dicit, dispense in praeceptis secundae tabulae, per quae homo immediate ordinatur ad proximum: bonum enim proximi est quoddam bonum particulare. He does not autem potest dispense in praeceptis primae tabulae, per quae homo ordinatur in Deum, here a se ipso alios non potest avertere, non enim potest deny se ipsum, ut dicitur II ad Tim. II, 13, quamvis quidam dicant, quod ea quae dicuntur de Osea, sunt intelligenda contigisse in vision prophetiae. " God cannot dispense from the precepts of the first table of the Decalogue, he can instead dispense, as we have seen, from the precepts of the second table, making that it is not a sin, otherwise it would be sin; in fact with the precepts of the first table men are ordained to God, universal good, and God cannot deny himself by distancing men from himself. St. Thomas cites the case of Hosea but is not, however, sure that God really commanded Hosea something that is normally sin because he points out how some say that those things that are claimed about Hosea happened not in reality but in vision. prophetic.

  1. Alfonso de Liguori, Doctor of the Church, with regard to the dispensation affirms that it excuses from the transgression of the precept and, in particular with regard to the Pope, says: "The pope can dispense from ordinary podestà in all canonical laws, also made by the apostles, as particular prelates of the churches: in conformity are the Lenten fast, the observance of Sundays, the prohibition of the bigamus from becoming ordained, etc., according to St. Thomas (Quodlib. 4. art. 13.) who says that the pope can dispense in all things pertaining to ad determinationem divini cultus, but not in the laws handed down by Jesus Christ, according to the laws concerning the matter and form of the sacraments, and regarding the oblation of the Mass (Lib. 1. n. 188. cum Salm. et aliis commun.).
  2. If then the pope can also dispense in some divine precepts; it is answered that in those things, in which the ius divino is born of the human will, such as vows and oaths, it is certainly among all, which the pope (provided there is just cause) can dispense; because then, it is not that the pope takes away the ius divino, but takes away the foundation of the obligation, or even, as St. Thomas (2. 2. q. 88. art. 12.), determinat quid sit Deo acceptum. The question is whether he can dispense in those things that absolutely depend on divine will. There are three sentences. The first, which is of the abbot, and of a few others, affirms it universally; but this commonly occurs again. The second, which is of Navarro, Cano, Sanchez, etc., affirms it only in some particular cases, such as in marriage

rato, residence of bishops, in giving simple priests the faculty of administering orders, confirmation, and the like; because in these things there can be such a cause that it prefers the indecency considered by the precept; but he denies it in other things in which in any case indecency must be avoided, as in the precept not to fornicate, not to change the matters and forms of the sacraments (at least as regards substance), and the like. The third most common and most probable sentence of Suarez, Silvestro, Castropal., And Covarruvia with s. Thomas (2. 2. q. 97. a. 4.), universally denies it, because the inferior can do nothing in the laws of the superior. Nonetheless most likely they say Soto, Suarez, Navarro, Coninchio, Valenzia, Durando, etc. that the pope in some particular case may well, not dispense, but declare, that divine law then does not oblige, since such a power in the pope seems necessary for the good governance of the church, in regard to so many various circumstances that may necessary (Law 6. de matr. n. 1110.). "[134]

Regarding this sentence and the opinions of Suarez and others on the possibility that the Pope affirms that the divine law does not oblige, it is not clear that this means that the Pope can dispense from the Decalogue precepts. F. Suarez, in particular, very directly follows s. Thomas and affirms that not even God can dispense from the precepts of the Decalogue, man, and in particular the Pope, can specify, in the Truth, about the matter of the precept, which is subject to mutation and clarification, p. ex. what previously belonged to one person can become another and therefore what was theft is no longer so ... (cf. F. Suarez "Tractatus de legibus et de Deo Legislatore" l. II c. XV n. 16) but not he can dispense from the precepts of the Decalogue.

The famous text of moral theology according to the Alphonsian doctrine written by Aertnys and Damen affirms that only God can dispense from positive divine law the norms of natural law are given true, the Church does not have the power to grant dispensation properly so called about positive divine law ; the Church can interpret the positive divine law and, by her vicarious power, she can improperly dispense in positive divine law as she relies on a human fact; in this line the Church dispenses in the marriage bond ratified but not consummated (cf. Aertnys and Damen "Theologia Moralis." Marietti, 1956, vol. I p. 145s)

The absolute indispensability of the commands of the Decalogue is perfectly welded to the truth that the negative precepts of the Decalogue are valid always and forever ... always and in all circumstances[135] such negative precepts are always and absolutely obligatory to the point of being absolutely indispensable.

Only God, and within the limits, suitable for him, of Justice, can "dispense" from divine and natural laws, not men and not even the Pope ... as we said above: no one can dispense himself or others from the Decalogue, and this is true also for the Confessor and for the penitent ... and this is also true after Amoris Laetitia and after the letter of the Argentine Bishops ...

As far as epikeia is concerned, let's say first of all that this term and its concept originate in classical Greece[136]

Aristotle deals with epikeia in depth: “The Aristotelian study of epikeia undoubtedly constitutes a culminating moment in the history of this concept. And this must be affirmed not only because this study is the most classic and the most organic, but also because its influence on the Catholic moral tradition was decisive. "[137]

The translation of the Bible into Greek, LXX, uses the Greek term ἐπιείκεια several times and related words such as ἐπιεικής etc. in the sense of clemency, equity in particular of God and of men close to God[138]

In the New Testament the term in question and the words connected to it are found in various cases in the sense already seen in the LXX, we speak of epikeia of Christ (2 Cor. 10,1; Phil. 2,5) Christians must show epikeia (Phil. 3,20) and in particular this must take place in the community (2 Cor. 10, 6.8) and more generally Christians must show epikeia towards all men (Phil. 4,5) This epikeia comes from Heaven and is in close relationship with Heaven (cfr. Phil. 2,15s) and manifests the clemency of the inhabitants of Heaven; in this line the wisdom that comes from Heaven (Jas. 3,17) is full of epikeia.[139]

The term in question with its derivatives is obviously found in the Fathers of the Church in the sense of clemency, meekness (cf. H. Preisker "ἐπιείκεια" in "Great Lexicon of the New Testament" Paideia, Brescia 1967 v. III p. 708 s. ); through the comments to Aristotle this group of terms enters the Latin Middle Ages, in particular: “… with the Latin translation of the Nicomachean Ethics by Roberto Grossatesta. Before, only the Aristotelian text of Topics VI, 3, 141a was known and also the aequitas of the Romanist tradition. "[140]

The concept of epikeia, according to St. Thomas, is identical to that of equity and is based on the truth that it is not possible to establish a human rule that in some cases is not inadequate because the law has as its object human acts, which concern contingent things and which can vary in infinite ways. . (cf. II-II q. 120 a. 1); epikeia is therefore the virtue by which the person, in cases where human law is inadequate, asserts not the law itself but the rule of justice and common utility, p. ex. the law states that it is always necessary to return what one has in deposit but if a furious madman comes to take back the sword he left me in storage and with it he can kill defenseless people, the epikeia tells me that I must not return it to him. ( cf. II-II q. 120 a. 1)

More precisely, epikeia does not intervene in every case but only when the law is clearly harmful to the community and the danger is immediate and one cannot expect to have recourse to the superior; then it is necessary to act according to epikeia; if, on the other hand, the observance of this law does not involve an immediate danger, it must not be the individual through epikeia who interpret the law but this is the responsibility of the prince. (cfr. I-II, q. 96 a. 6 co.)

Epikeia essentially concerns human norms, it is guided by natural law and enforces this right and natural justice against simply legal justice, epikeia is obviously better than legal justice;[141] epikeia corresponds to legal justice overcoming it precisely with natural justice. (cfr. II-II q. 120 a. 2) In this s. Thomas follows in a certain way St. Albert the Great who considers epikeia to be better than legal justice but not natural right and therefore natural law, epikeia must therefore be traced back to natural law.[142]

  1. In this line Thomas clearly denies that we can give epikeia of the precepts of the Decalogue which are even revealed divine law: they contain the natural law and surpass it; the norms of the Decalogue, specifies s. Thomas, contain in themselves the intention of the Legislator and are indispensable (cf. I-II q. 100 a. 8); on the other hand we have seen that, according to St. Thomas, the negative precepts of the Decalogue oblige always and in every circumstance[143] and at any cost, so it is obvious that they are absolutely removed from epikeia.

Starting with Cajetan, a famous commentator on s. Thomas, the problem of the relationship between epikeia and natural law is posed on the basis of a careful examination of human positive law: the positive law, which is precisely the subject of epikeia, actually contains two orders of precepts: some that are merely positive and others that actually belong to natural law and among these precepts of natural law it is necessary to distinguish two types: those that are universally true and that never fail (e.g. one must not lie, one must not commit adultery, etc.) and regarding to these there is never epikeia, those that are true in most cases but not always because they contain rules which if applied always deviate from righteousness in some cases, such as the precept that things received in deposit must be returned, and with regard to these, the epikeia takes place: “Nam quaedam sic sunt universaliter vera ut in nullo casu deficiant: ut non esse mentiendum, non esse adulterium perpetrandum, et huiusmodi. Et in istis, quia deficere nequeunt, nullum locum habet aequitas. Quaedam vero sunt quae ut in pluribus rectitudinem continent, in aliquo tamen casu a rectitudine declinarent si servarentur. Ut, deposita reddenda esse rectum est ut in pluribus: quia tamen when, si redderetur depositum, esset iniquum, oportuit aliquod aliud directivum inveniri horum operum in quibus lex naturalis depositorum. "[144] Cajetan's reasoning is truly illuminating and explains very well how some natural norms implicated in positive norms are susceptible to epikeia and others not; There are, I repeat, rules of natural law that are always valid and rules of this law that are valid only in some cases and only on these latter is epikeia carried out.

I emphasize that this clearly means that what s. Thomas affirms about the human law and its limited extension in II-II q. 120 a.1 in c. it should not be extended to natural law, there are, in particular, some laws of this right that are absolutely always valid!

Gaetano's reasoning is truly illuminating and precise, precisely in the line of Cajetan we must read what s. Alphonsus about epikeia when he says that it applies to human laws and also to natural ones[145]; s. Alfonso normally follows s. Thomas and also in this case his line is in the Thomist line, in particular in the line of the best commentator of the Angelic Doctor; positive human law can be subjected to epikeia and the norms of natural law implied in it which are not valid in all cases, natural norms which are always valid, are excluded from epikeia. Therefore in particular the norms that are valid always and forever, that is the negative norms of the Decalogue, are excluded from epikeia.

The famous text of moral theology according to the Alphonsian doctrine made by Aertnys and Damen essentially goes along this line (see Aertnys and Damen "Theologia Moralis .." Marietti, 1956, vol. I p. 320s)

Wernz-Vidal's text similarly states: “Similiter duplex exsistit aequum scl. natural and legal aequum. Aequum naturale idem plane est atque iustum naturale. Quo sensu vel ipsa iura cívilia saepe loquuntur de aequitate naturals: “Neque enim inaudita causa quemquam damnari aequitatis ratio patítur” (18). Aequìtas hoc modo intellecta non est emendatio iuris, sed potìus regula ipsius iuxta L. 90 D. de RII 17: “In omnibus quidem maxíme tamen in iure aequitas spectanda est”. Aequum vero legal dicitur prudens moderatio legis scriptae (19) praeter rigorm verborum illius atque ita oppositur stricto iuri. Huiusmodi emendatio iusti legalis sive aequitas exercetur per epikeiam (20). . Ad virtutem enim epikeiae spectat contra verba legis humanae agere in particulari. when illius observatio esset illicita et contra naturalem aequitatem aut saltem nimis gravis et difficile. (21). Quo in casu iudex dicitur agere non iure ie materìaliter spectato. et ut verba sonant. sed aequo et bono, et ius ipsum ìuxta íntentíonem legislatorìs servatur. Dum contrary agendi modo ius potius violatur iuxta RI 88 in Sext .: “Certum est, quod is committít in legem, qui legis verba complectens contra legìs nititur voluntatem”.[146]

There is therefore a double equity: one natural and one legal; natural equity is natural justice which is the rule of law itself; the virtue of epikeia intervenes to implement legal equity with a prudent moderation of the written law that is opposed to the strict law, the virtue of epikeia is responsible for acting against the words of human law in particular when the observance of it would be illicit and contrary to natural fairness or at least too serious and difficult. Epikeia is therefore guided by natural law and does not apply to natural law understood with depth in its fundamental principles that are always valid.

What we have said must make us understand that epikeia has no space with regard to the Decalogue; that is, in particular with regard to those always valid norms established by natural morality and also presented in divine law as absolutely obligatory.

As Cardinal Ratzinger explains, epikeia has no place with regard to divine law, in fact: "Epicheia and aequitas canonica are of great importance in the context of human and purely ecclesial norms, but they cannot be applied in the sphere of norms, over which the Church has no discretion. "[147] … Obviously the Church has no discretion over the divine commandments. God give us Light and make himself courageous to assert the Truth of him. What Card. Ratzinger said was recently repeated by Card. Müller: "Even the doctrine of the epichèia, according to which a law is valid in general terms, but human action cannot always correspond totally to it, cannot be applied in this case, because the indissolubility of sacramental marriage is a norm of divine law, which is therefore not in the authoritative availability of the Church. This, however, has the full power - along the lines of Pauline privilege - to clarify what conditions must be satisfied before a marriage can be defined as indissoluble according to the meaning attributed to it by Jesus. On this basis, the Church has established the impediments to marriage that are grounds for nullity of marriage and has developed a detailed procedural procedure. "[148]

The cardi. Ruini affirmed in this same line: "As for canonical" epikeia "and" aequitas ", these are very important criteria in the context of human and purely ecclesial norms, but they cannot be applied to the norms of divine law, on which the Church it has no discretion. "[149]

Therefore there is no epikeia or dispensation from the commandments of the Decalogue. Therefore no one can "free himself" or "free" others from the observance of the 10 commandments through dispensation and epikeia; the Pope, in particular, cannot exempt anyone from observing these precepts, on the contrary ... the Pope must be the first to observe them and the first to defend them ...

God enlighten us better and better.

e) Like Amoris Laetitia in n. 304s slyly puts aside the revealed Law ...

Amoris Laetitia says in n. 304 which is wrong: to consider only if a person's actions conform to a law or a general norm, because this is not enough to understand if man is fully faithful to God and to better explain the message he wants to convey, the Pope presents a text by s. Thomas Aquinas who states: «Although in general things there is a certain necessity, the more one goes down to particular things, the more one finds indeterminacy. […] In the practical field the truth or practical norm is not the same for everyone with respect to the particular, but only with respect to what is general; and even among those who accept the same practical norm in particular cases, this is not equally known by all. […] And the more the uncertainty increases the more we go into the particular ». (Summa Theologiae I-II, q. 94, art.4)

The Pope continues by affirming that the general norms: "... present a good that must never be disregarded or neglected, but in their formulation they cannot absolutely embrace all particular situations."

On the other hand, what is the fruit of discernment of a particular case cannot be elevated to a general norm, continues the Pope. Here the Pope quotes another text by St. Thomas for whom “Quia igitur prudentia est ratio activa, oportet quod prudens habeat utramque notitiam, scilicet et universalium et particularium; vel, si alteram solum contingat ipsum habere, magis debet habere hanc, scilicet notitiam particularium, quae sunt propinquiora operationi. " (Sententia libri Ethicorum, VI, 6, 11) Since prudence is active reason, it is necessary that the prudent have both the knowledge of universal and particular things, if it were possible to have only one of these sciences, that of particular things would be preferable , which are closer to the operation.

I immediately point out that the texts in question speak of natural law, not of divine (positive) law. In particular, the text of the book of the book “Sententia libri Ethicorum” deals with philosophical questions and precisely gives indications for a philosophical discernment, on the basis of natural law.

The same Exhortation also speaks of natural law in n. 305 where he reports a text of the International Theological Commission ... on fundamental questions of morality the Pope cleverly puts aside the revealed Law, therefore also the Law of charity ... in this way while citing St. Thomas Pope Francis goes against sound Thomist doctrine and above all goes against sound Catholic doctrine, as we will see better in the next paragraphs.

and, 1) Thorough examination of I-II q. 94 a.4, text quoted in Amoris Laetita n. 304.

Let us now examine the article of the Theological Sum, I-II q. 94 a.4, presented partially in the text of Amoris Laetitia at n. 304; the article can be read in its entirety here on the Corpus Thomisticum website, here http://www.corpusthomisticum.org/sth2094.html#37604 and, in Latin with Italian translation, here on the Edizioni Studio Domenicano website https: // www. edizionistudiodomenicano.it/Docs/Sfogliabili/La_Somma_Teologica_Seconda_Parte/index.html#916

To fully understand what Angelico is saying, it is necessary to go to the parallel passages of his works: I-II q. 94. a. 5 in c .; II-II, q. 57, a. 2, to 1; In 3 Sent., D. 37, q. 1, a. 3; to. 4, to 2; In 4 Sent., D. 33, q. 1, a. 2, to 1; De Malo, q. 2, a. 4, to 13; In 5 Ethic., Lect. 12 etc.

  1. Thomas is evidently speaking of the natural law, common to all men, and in the article in question he asks whether all peoples know, recognize and apply the principles of natural law. The speech of St. Thomas is general, for all men, and does not enter in particular into the examination of Christian peoples who have faith, St. Thomas does not speak directly of faith here; rather he abstracts from faith ... and develops a discourse that concerns man and is essentially based on good philosophy and right reason, he speaks of practical reason and speculative reason ... but he does not speak specifically of faith.
  2. Thomas specifies elsewhere that: ”… fides est in intellectu speculativo sicut in subiecto, ut manifeste patet ex fidei obiecto. Sed quia veritas prima, quae est fidei obiectum, est finis omnium Desideriorum et actionum nostrarum, ut patet per Augustinum, in I de Trin .; inde est quod per dilectionem operatur. Sicut etiam intellectus speculativus extension fit practicus, ut dicitur in III de anima. " (II-II q.4 a. 2 ad.3) Faith illuminates the speculative and practical intellect.

It still says yes. Thomas: “Cum enim credo sit actus intellectus absentientis vero ex imperio voluntatis, ad hoc quod iste actus sit perfectus duo requiruntur. Quorum unum est ut infallibiliter intellectus tendat in suum bonum, quod est verum, aliud autem est ut infallibiliter ordinetur ad ultimum finem, propter quem voluntas assentit vero. Et utrumque invenitur in actu fidei formatae. Nam ex ratione ipsius fidei est quod intellectus semper feratur in verum, quia fidei non potest subesse falsum, ut supra habitum est, ex caritate autem, quae format fidem, habet anima quod infallibiliter voluntas ordinetur in bonum finem. Et ideo fides formata est virtus. ”(II-II q.4 a. 5) For the living, formed faith, truth illumines the intellect, illumines reason and leads it to correct judgments.

We saw above that moral conscience is the judgment of practical reason on the actions performed or those to be performed.

We saw that the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in n. 1794: "The good and pure conscience is illuminated by sincere faith."

The corrupt rule, says s. Thomas, it is not a rule, false reason is not reason, therefore the rule of human actions is not simply reason but right reason (cfr. Super Sent., II d.24 q.3 a.3 ad 3m.)

  1. Thomas specifies that the moral conscience to be upright must be guided and regulated by God: First Rule, Eternal Law (cfr. II-IIae q.23 a. 3 in c. And a.6 in c.).

Moral conscience as an act of (practical) reason evidently bears within itself the consequences of the wound inflicted on our reason by sin (original and actual), a wound which is the ignorance by which reason is displaced from its order towards the truth ("ratio destituitur his order ad verum") (Cfr. I-IIae q.85 a.3)

Human moral conscience, insofar as it is deprived of grace due to original sin, by itself is not capable of knowing the things of faith and is not capable of opposing what goes against faith (cf. Super Sent., II d . 39 q.3 a.1 to 3m)

Through his Incarnation for our salvation, he explains the s. Angelic Doctor, the Lord has purified our conscience with his Blood (Super Heb., Chap. 9 l. 3) By accepting the gift of God in Christ, our conscience is purified by grace and faith, it is a conscience illuminated by the salvation brought by Christ, it is a Christian moral conscience, that is, a rectified conscience under the guidance of the Holy Spirit; s. Thomas says about it: "Testis infallibilis sanctorum est eorum conscientia, unde (Apostolus nd r.) subdit “testimonium mihi perhibente conscientia mea” II Cor.1,12 “Gloria nostra haec est, testimonium conscientiae nostrae”. Et quia interdum conscientia errat nisi per Spiritum Sanctum rectificetur, subdit “in Spiritu Sancto”. Supra 8,16 "Ipse Spiritus testimonium reddit spiritui nostra." (See super rom. c.9 lec.1.) Note: for the saints the infallible witness is the moral conscience; and why is he infallible? Because he is a witness rectified, through grace, by the Holy Spirit who is God; he is, therefore, a witness fully guided and regulated by God: First Rule, Eternal Law (cf. II-IIa q.23 a. 3 in c. and a.6 in c.). Through faith and grace, God Truth rectifies the moral conscience of the faithful, making them participate in the wisdom of Christ, as confirmed by St. Thomas in this text that follows: “…“ nos autem ”, scilicet spirituales viri,“ sensum Christi habemus ”idest recipimus in nobis sapientiam Christi ad iudicandum. Eccli 17,6: Creavit illis scientiam spiritus, sensu adimplevit corda illorum "(Super I Cor. c.2 lec.3.). We, that is, spiritual men, have the thought of Christ, that is, we have received the wisdom of Christ to judge. Moral conscience as enlightened by faith is Christian conscience, the conscience we receive in Christ. In him we receive the gift of a truly upright and holy conscience which includes the perception of the principles of morality according to the revealed Truth, their application in factual circumstances through a practical discernment of reasons and goods and, above all, upright and holy judgment concerning concrete acts that must be carried out or which have already been carried out. The full truth about the moral good is practically and correctly recognized through the prudent judgment of a conscience illuminated by faith, especially if it is alive. The infused virtues combined with charity dispose us in a perfect way to the fulfillment of the act which is the supernatural moral conscience. The Christian moral conscience is an act, instead the infused virtues are dispositions to the act therefore the infused virtues also predispose to the fulfillment of the act which is the Christian moral conscience. Faith, insofar as it is alive and united with charity, is an infused virtue that perfectly predisposes man to the fulfillment of the act which is the Christian moral conscience: "Id enim quod universaliter fide tenemus, puta usum ciborum esse licitum vel illicitum, conscientia applicat ad opus quod est factum vel faciendum "(Super Rom., chap. 14 l.

The Sacred Cross be our light.

What I have just said above means that faith enlightens the moral conscience and practical reason ... and leads us to judge correctly what to do ...

The text of I-II q. 94 a.4 inasmuch as it abstracts from faith it is radically unsuitable to accurately explain the discernment of a Catholic believer, and the quotation that the Pope makes in Amoris Laetitia is radically unsuitable and obviously misleading to accurately explain the discernment of a Catholic believer . The Pope affirms in n. 304: “I warmly pray that we always remember what St. Thomas Aquinas teaches and that we learn to assimilate it in pastoral discernment:“ Although in general things there is a certain necessity, the more one goes down to particular things, the more one finds uncertainty. […] In the practical field the truth or practical norm is not the same for everyone with respect to the particular, but only with respect to what is general; and even among those who accept the same practical norm in particular cases, this is not equally known by all. […] And the more the uncertainty increases the more we go into the particular »(I-II q. 94 a. 4). "

But this is simple natural human ethics, absolutely insufficient for a discernment of Christian believers who have faith and a moral conscience enlightened by faith.

Christian faith and moral conscience clearly specify the moral judgment and discernment of the Christian by making known to him his obligation to conform to the 10 commandments and therefore the value semper et pro semper of the negative precepts of the Decalogue.

The Christian's judgment is determined by the light of faith and therefore by the light of Revelation.

Says s. Thomas, as seen, that we have received, by grace, the wisdom of Christ to judge (cf. Super I Cor. C.2 lec.3.); moral conscience enlightened by faith is an act enlightened by the wisdom that comes to us through grace, that is, ultimately, by the wisdom of Christ. Christ, the highest Rule conforming to us and Head of his Mystical Body, gives us supernatural wisdom in faith and charity (Super Sentence, III d. 13 q. 2 a. 1 in c.); from Christ the Head, therefore, we receive the intelligence, wisdom and charity to be able to carry out the perfect act of supernatural moral conscience. In this supernatural act, faith specifies the universal judgment of synderesis (see Super Sentence, lib. 2 d. 39 q. 3 a. 2 in c.). So, as mentioned, in the supernatural moral conscience, synderesis remains but assisted by faith, in this line we must understand what s says. Thomas in the following text:

"Deinde cum dicit" Beatus qui non iudicat "[...] Id enim quod universaliter fide tenemus, puta usum ciborum esse licitum vel illicitum, conscientia applicat ad opus quod est factum vel faciendum [...]" (Super Rom., Chap. 14 l . 3.)

For us this means that the supernatural conscience, always guided by synderesis but precisely assisted by faith, applies to the concrete case what we universally hold by faith. Faith is therefore the light on the basis of which supernatural moral conscience is fulfilled, through faith we participate in Christ in the knowledge of God:

"... per potentiam intellectivam homo participat cognitionem Dei per virtutem fidei ..." (Cfr. I-IIae q. 110 a.4 in c.)

By faith, therefore, we participate in divine knowledge, in Christ, so that we can truly judge our actions.

By faith the principles of supernatural working are fixed in us on the basis of which we judge our behavior.

Even when faith is not alive, and is not united with sanctifying grace, it illuminates our moral conscience and makes it Christian.

  1. Thomas affirms that faith illuminates the intellect by giving it the knowledge of supernatural truths which are principles for supernatural action (cf. De virtutibus, q. 1 a. 10 in co.); but it should be noted that the faith we are talking about here is, above all, perfect faith, and in order for the act of faith to be perfect and meritorious it is necessary that the habit of virtue be in the intellect, for faith itself, and in the will. (cf. II-II a. 2 ad 2m), for charity (cf. II-II a. 3). For the faith perfected by charity, the judgment of Christ on a determined action is fulfilled in us in the fullest way, it is for this faith that Christ's wisdom to judge is shared in a very high way, it is for this faith united to the charity that the divine life, through Christ comes into us and with it come the gifts of the Holy Spirit who root more fully in us the habit of faith and perfect our conscience.

The Theological Commission affirmed in this line: “Faith, as a theological virtue, enables the believer to participate in the knowledge that God has of himself and of all things. ... Through grace and theological virtues, believers become "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Pt 1,4) and are in some way made connatural to God. ... "[150]

The International Theological Commission further explains "Charity permits the unfolding of the gifts of the Holy Spirit in believers, leading them to a higher understanding of the things of faith" with all spiritual wisdom and intelligence "(Col 1,9). [Cf. International Theological Commission, Theology today, nn. 91-92.] In fact, the theological virtues are fully expressed in the life of the believer only if he allows himself to be guided by the Holy Spirit (cf. Rom 8,14:XNUMX). "[151]

In this regard, it is necessary to consider that, as mentioned, consciousness, at a natural level, is the application of the operative habits of reason which are synderesis, science and wisdom; at the supernatural level, moral conscience is participation in the perfection of Christ, participation that is realized in us through faith, above all through living faith with charity, the infused virtues and the gifts of the Holy Spirit: in fact, charity informs and perfects faith and carries in the human soul all the virtues and gifts of the Holy Spirit; through this participation in the perfections of Christ we can carry out in the highest and most divine way the 2 acts of which moral conscience consists: examination and advice or deliberation (cf. De veritate, q.17 a.1 in c.) through such participation we can judge our acts in the most perfect way. For this participation in the perfections of Christ, furthermore, our will, which is the fulcrum of the Christian moral life, can orient itself towards the beatitude of heaven and therefore towards all the holy and meritorious acts that truly lead to it.

Even shapeless faith, which is devoid of charity, makes us participate, in a certain way, in the wisdom of Christ but in a less perfect way and enlightens the Christian moral conscience.

The Sacred Cross be our light.

Amoris Laetitia therefore practically puts aside faith and simply stops at the natural practical reason of the men referred to by s. Thomas in I-II q. 94 a.4.

Amoris Laetitia stops at the natural law and does not go to Revelation… yet also St. Thomas, as we have seen, explains very well the limits of the natural law and the necessity of the positive divine law: "Ad primum ergo dicendum quod lex scripta dicitur esse given ad correctionem legis naturae, vel quia per legem scriptam suppletum est quod legi naturae deerat, vel quia lex naturae in aliquorum cordibus, quantum ad aliqua, corrupta erat intantum ut existimarent esse bona quae naturaliter sunt mala; et talis corruptio correctione indigebat. "(I-II q. 94 a. 5 ad 1m) The written law was given to correct the natural law both because what was lacking in it was added, and because the law of nature was corrupt in some hearts as to something so that they esteemed good things that are naturally bad, and such corruption required correction.

A few pages above, speaking of the relationship between the natural law and the positive divine law, we have seen amply why it was necessary for God to give the divine law. St. Thomas, whom the Pope says he is referring to, deals abundantly with the positive divine law in his works; only in the Sum Theological s. Doctor dedicates at least 10 questions and about 60 articles to the discussion of the positive divine law.

The virtue of faith and the command of the same faith of which St. Thomas speaks abundantly in his works ...

f) I repeat: Amoris Laetitia in nos. 304s incredibly disappears, on an essential point of morality, the revealed Law and therefore the Law of charity, let's see why.

I strongly and precisely emphasize what I have just said: what s. Thomas in I-II q. 94 a. 4 concerns the natural law and not the positive divine law, which is given to us precisely by correction of the natural law and for our eternal salvation, as the saint himself clearly says; what the Angelic Doctor says in I-II q. 94 a. 4, as we noted above, is absolutely unsuitable and deviant in order to give precise indications about the discernment that Catholic believers must carry out because this article does not speak of faith and its action in the life of the Christian. The Pope says to refer to St. Thomas, who deals abundantly, in his works, with the positive divine law and with faith, but Amoris Laetitia at n. 304 precisely highlights this affirmation about the natural law and about practical reason and sets aside the revealed divine law given by God precisely for the correction and overcoming of the natural law and for the eternal salvation of souls and sets aside faith. Practically the same is done by the Pope at n. 305, but using a text of the Theological Commission, where he states “Therefore, a Pastor cannot feel satisfied only by applying moral laws to those who live in“ irregular ”situations, as if they were stones thrown at people's lives. This is the case of closed hearts, which often hide even behind the teachings of the Church "to sit on the chair of Moses and judge, sometimes with superiority and superficiality, difficult cases and wounded families".[152] The International Theological Commission pronounced itself along this same line: "Natural law cannot therefore be presented as an already constituted set of rules that are imposed a priori on the moral subject, but it is a source of objective inspiration for its process, eminently personal, decision making ".[153]"

Amoris Laetitia, I underline, subtly and discreetly puts aside the divine Law revealed with its clarity, precision and its indispensability and obligatory nature, which Tradition highlights, Amoris Laetitia puts aside infused faith, to present statements regarding natural law and simple practical reason!

This is a very serious fact that seems to me to be explained very well if we consider the subversion that the Pope is carrying out with regard to sound doctrine.

It should be noted, in fact, that the Theological Commission in the document cited speaks of the existence and pre-eminence of the positive divine law alongside the natural law and says: "Grace does not destroy nature but heals it, comforts it and leads it to its full realization. . Therefore, ... the natural law ... is not alien to the order of grace. Jesus Christ did not "come to abolish but to give full fulfillment" to the Law (Mt 5,17:13,34) (…). ... But he also confirmed its essential content and, in his person, brought the practice of the Law to perfection, taking on for love the different types of precepts - moral, cultic and judicial - of the Mosaic Law, which correspond to the three functions of prophet , priest and king. … Jesus valued the ethical primacy of charity in various ways, which inseparably unites the love of God and the love of neighbor (…). Charity is the "new commandment" (Jn XNUMX:XNUMX) which summarizes the whole Law and gives it the key to its interpretation ... The Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount explain the way in which the commandment of love must be lived, in gratuitousness and in the sense of the other, elements proper to the new perspective assumed by Christian love. … The very person of Christ, Logos and Wisdom incarnate, thus become the living law, the supreme norm for all Christian ethics. … The grace of the Holy Spirit constitutes the main element of the new Law or Law of the Gospel… The new Law of the Gospel includes, assumes and fulfills the requirements of the natural law. The orientations of the natural law are therefore not external normative instances with respect to the new law. They are a constitutive part of this, even if second and ordered to the main element, which is the grace of Christ (…). Therefore, it is in the light of reason now enlightened by living faith that man better recognizes the orientations of natural law, which show him the way to the full development of his humanity. "[154]

We saw above that faith is linked to the revealed Law and precisely, as we have just seen: "... it is in the light of reason now illuminated by living faith that man better recognizes the orientations of natural law, which show him the way to full development of his humanity. " More generally, faith illuminates reason and presents it with the revealed Law to live.

St. Thomas, on the basis of Holy Scripture, as well as indicating the divine commands for our eternal salvation, specifies, as we saw above, that: the negative precepts of the Decalogue always and forever oblige while the affirmative precepts always oblige but not "Ad semper", that is, they oblige a suitable place and time [155] St. Thomas affirms in this line in the Theological Sum: “Sed considerandum est quod sicut praecepta negative legis prohibent actus peccatorum, ita praecepta affirmativa inducunt ad actus virtutum. Actus autem peccatorum sunt secundum se mali, et nullo modo bene fieri possunt, nec aliquo tempore aut loco, quia secundum se sunt conjuncti malo fine, ut dicitur in II Ethic. Et ideo praecepta negative obligant semper et ad semper. ”(II-II q. 33 a. 2 in c.) The negative precepts oblige always and forever because they forbid sins that are intrinsically evil and in no way, in no time and nowhere can they become good. The negative precepts are valid always and forever and like all the precepts of the Decalogue they do not admit any dispensation. (cfr. I-II, q. 100, a. 8); the positive precepts oblige a suitable place and time (Super Sent., lib. 3 d. 25 q. 2 a. 1 qc. 2 ad 3)

VS clearly reaffirms, also on the basis of Holy Scripture and the positive divine law, the Catholic doctrine presented by St. Thomas when he states: “The Church has always taught that one must never choose behaviors prohibited by the moral commandments, expressed in negative form in the Old and New Testament. As we have seen, Jesus himself reiterates the imperative, always and in every circumstance, of these prohibitions: "If you want to enter life, keep the commandments ...: do not kill, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not testify false" (Mt 19,17-18)…. "(VS no. 52)

The Law of charity, the Law of Christ reaffirms the inviolability, always and in every circumstance, of these negative commands, from the revealed Law also springs the precept of faith which precisely enlightens reason and affirms the inviolability of the divine Law revealed and in particular the absolute imperative, always and in all circumstances, of the negative commands of the Law itself ... but to affirm this clearly in Amoris Laetitia would have destroyed a large part of the subversive work of the Pope and his collaborators, especially with regard to the "legitimation of adultery , homosexual acts "etc. ... so it seems clear to me that it was necessary to put aside the positive divine law, with its clarity and precision, with the faith connected to it and with the Tradition which interprets it in the sense of the indestructibility, always and in all circumstances, of negative precepts ...

More precisely: to clearly affirm in Amoris Laetitia that, on the basis of the revealed divine law and for faith, as also says St. Thomas, there are very precise absolute norms that are always valid and to which we can never disobey, norms including the one for which one can never commit adultery or the one for which one can never commit an act of homosexuality, "he broke the eggs in the basket" to Pope and those who are working with him the subversion of Catholic morality. The Pope and his collaborators therefore studied and "cleverly" presented some Thomistic statements referring to natural law, abstracting from faith and which could support the point of view in the line of the Pontiff's "paradigm shift" and quietly put the Law aside. divine revealed with its clear imperative, with its clear indispensability, with its obligations that are always valid and with the faith that it commands ... I repeat: they have quietly put aside the revealed divine law and faith, which guide us to eternal salvation ! The Pope and his collaborators also quietly put aside Veritatis Splendor and presented in an objectively deceptive way, accommodating them to their intentions, the Thomist doctrine and the Catholic doctrine!

To understand what lies behind the n. 304s of Amoris Laetitia, the following affirmations of the cardd. Baldisseri and Kasper. Cardinal Baldisseri said: “And in fact not so much the Synod, it will be important, but the synthesis that will be prepared from it, and which will be signed by the Pope as a“ Post-Synodal Exhortation ”. It is very likely that it will not be a clear and definitive text, but based on a "floating" interpretation. So that each reading it, can pull it to the side that suits them most. "[156] … The following text very significantly encapsulates the affirmations of Cardinal Kasper: “« The door is open », he said in reference to the discipline of the sacraments for the divorced and remarried, but« the Pope did not say how to pass through them. But he - Kasper said - did not repeat the negative statements of previous popes about what is not possible and not allowed. So there is room for individual bishops and individual episcopal conferences ". … The cardinal also gave a concrete example that reveals much of the "case by case" practice present in Amoris Laetitia, regarding the Eucharist for divorced and remarried people. When Kasper was bishop of Rottenburg a pastor asked him about a divorced and remarried mother who had prepared her daughter for Holy Communion "much better" than others. "A very active woman in the Church and who was in Caritas," he emphasizes. The priest did not forbid this mother to access the Eucharist on the day of her daughter's first communion. "That priest was right", explains Kasper, and "I said this to Pope Francis who confirmed my attitude". "[157]

To create a text with a "floating" interpretation and to open the door mentioned by Cardinal Kasper and more generally to open the doors to all the errors included in the "paradigm shift" it was certainly not useful to reiterate the doctrine in Amoris Laetitia Catholic, of which the Thomist doctrine is part, about the positive divine Law, with its precision and its obligatory nature and about the faith that is linked to this Law ... therefore this doctrine has been discreetly set aside ...

To understand what lies behind the nos. 304s by Amoris Laetitia it seems very significant to recall that, in the 2014 Synod, Pope Francis, even if the paragraphs concerning the pastoral care of people with homosexual tendencies and the question of communion for the divorced had not reached the required majority in the vote of the assembly. remarried, significantly, and notwithstanding the regulation, ordered that these passages result in the final text that would then be sent to the dioceses and parishes in order to inspire the proposals of the "base" for the Ordinary Synod of the following year[158]. " A highly significant fact, especially if we consider that, commenting on this fact, Cardinal Reinhard Marx declared: “Up until now, these two questions had been absolutely non-negotiable. Although they failed to obtain a two-thirds majority, the majority of the Synod Fathers still voted in their favor. "

"They are still part of the text," continued Marx. “I asked the Pope in particular about this, and the Pope said he wanted all the points published along with all the voting results. He wanted everyone in the Church to see where we were. No, this Pope has opened the doors wide and the results of the vote at the end of the synod will not change him “.[159] …. Card. Marx is a great friend and collaborator of the Pope and is the one who led the German Church at the Synod, whose first Assembly was held at the beginning of 2020, which in recent months is making a lot of talk about itself due to doctrinal deviations that wants to convey [160]...

To understand the importance of nos. 304-5 by Amoris Laetitia it must also be said that as many as 2 dubia of the cardinals have pinned themselves on them: “1. He wonders if, following what is stated in “Amoris laetitia” nos. 300-305, it has now become possible to grant absolution in the sacrament of Penance and therefore to admit to the Holy Eucharist a person who, being bound by a valid marriage bond, lives "more uxorio" with another, without fulfilling the conditions provided from "Familiaris consortio" n. 84 and then reiterated by “Reconciliatio et paenitentia” n. 34 and from “Sacramentum caritatis” n. 29. Can the expression “in certain cases” of note 351 (n. 305) of the exhortation “Amoris laetitia” be applied to divorced persons in a new union, who continue to live “more uxorio”?

The teaching of the encyclical of St. John Paul II VS n. 304, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, on the existence of absolute moral norms, valid without exception, which prohibit intrinsically evil acts? "[161]

Obviously the Pope did not answer directly ... In particular, if he had clearly said that he reaffirmed the VS doctrine on intrinsically evil acts and therefore the doctrine that emerges from the revealed Law and that the true faith affirms would have wrecked the whole "paradigm shift", if he had replied that the doctrine in question was no longer valid he would have exposed himself to the attacks of those who follow the sound doctrine and would have also risked creating very serious ecclesial consequences ... If he had clearly stated that those who live in a situation of sin can receive the Eucharist , equally he would have had big problems ...

Indirectly, the Pope replied to dubium n. 1 praising the letter of the Argentine Bishops and considering it a precise interpretation of Amoris Laetitia so that even those who find themselves in a situation of sin can in some cases receive sacramental absolution and the Eucharist without proposing not to sin anymore…. therefore accepting to continue to carry out objectively serious acts.

With regard to the second dubium, we will see better in the following pages which is the Pope's response that emerges from various indications ... but from now on we must be clear that precisely to subvert sound doctrine with "discretion" the Pope used the text of the Sum Theological s. Thomas (I-II q. 94 a.4).

g) Significant statements by the alleged shadow author of Amoris Laetitia about the absolute obligation of negative moral norms.

I also remember that Msgr. Fernández, the alleged shadow author of Amoris Laetitia, in an article that appears among the theological sources of Amoris Laetitia affirmed that: there is also the case of a sexual abstention that contradicts the Christian hierarchy of values ​​crowned by charity; think of the difficulty a woman has when she perceives that the stability of the family is put at risk by subjecting her non-practicing husband to periods of continence; in this case, an inflexible refusal of any use of condoms would make respect for an external norm prevail over the grave obligation to take care of loving communion and marital stability that charity most directly requires.[162] The use of condoms and therefore contraception is an intrinsically evil act that can never be chosen, hence the statement of Msgr. Fernández is clearly wrong; along this line, the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in n. 370: "... it is intrinsically evil" every action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its fulfillment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, as an aim or as a means, to prevent procreation ". (Paul VI, Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae, 14: AAS 60 (1968) 490.) "

In a 2011 article, Msgr. Fernández returns to the 2006 article that we have just examined, and regarding the question of the use of the condom he states: "En el artículo (pág. 150) I place the ejemplo de una mujer que, por preservar el amor y la estabilidad familiar, no rechaza and the use of condoms (cooperación material al pecado del cónyuge). Pretendo decir que, before a conflict of deberes, el cuidado del amor y la estabilidad familiar es una exigencia más directa de la caridad porque es un bien mayor por el cual puede ser lícito tolerar un misbehavior. ... Es lo que en la moral clásica se expresa como cooperación only material y propcionada en el mal. "[163]

So according to Msgr. Fernández the woman who, in order to preserve love and family stability, does not refuse the use of condoms (material cooperation with the spouse's sin) is only making material cooperation proportionate to the evil. Unfortunately, even saying this, Msgr. Fernández commits a serious mistake because in order to have material cooperation proportionate to the evil the act that takes place must not be objectively evil, more widely this cooperation can be lawful:

"... when these three conditions are given jointly:

the action of the cooperating spouse is not in itself illegal; (Denzinger-Schönmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum, 2795, 3634)

there are proportionately serious reasons for cooperating in the spouse's sin;

try to help the spouse (patiently, with prayer, with charity, with dialogue: not necessarily at that moment, nor on every occasion) to desist from such conduct. "[164]

The answer of the s. Uffizio cited (Denzinger-Schönmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum, 2795, 3634) clearly affirm that the act of the woman who passively accepts the use of a condom by her husband in the intimate relationship with her performs an intrinsically illicit act ... therefore the woman's cooperation who accepts the use of condoms in intimate intercourse is gravely illicit and is not material cooperation with sin.

As you can see Msgr. Fernández has already in the past affirmed intrinsically evil acts as lawful.

Mons. Fernández also affirmed that the moral law is always binding and does not have a gradualness, therefore, the phases of growth are oriented to allow the subject to fully respect it and "it is essential in this educational dynamic the non-dissolution of the law in the coordinates of feasible historical possibilities of human freedom "(cf. L. Melina, Morale: between crisis and renewal, Barcellona, ​​1996, 135.); Msgr. Fernández then states in a note that Melina's minimalist position cannot be accepted when he maintains that obedience to negative precepts is a prerequisite for graduality, since "Familiaris Consortio" 34 refers to gradualness precisely when it speaks of difficulties of spouses to apply negative precepts such as that which prohibits contraception.[165]

It is not Melina, as we have already said, who is wrong but Fernández because she believes that there may be a legitimate disobedience to negative precepts; negative precepts can never be violated and God's Law is indispensable. Obviously, Msgr. Fernández, precisely because he follows an erroneous doctrine, comes to criticize Msgr. Melina because the latter affirms, following the right doctrine, that obedience to the negative precepts of the Decalogue is a prior condition to the law of graduality.

The same Msgr. Fernández, in the line of the article just seen, in a commentary article to Amoris Laetitia then stated that Amoris Laetitia refers to people aware of the gravity of their situation, but with great difficulty in going back without feeling in conscience that they fall into new defects, if the act remains objectively dishonest and does not lose its objective gravity, it cannot be "elected" with conviction, as if it were part of the Christian ideal, still less could it be said that, with that "choice of life" , becomes subjectively honest. Another very different thing, says Msgr. Fernández, is to propose as Francis does, that in a context of attenuated guilt we try to respond to God's will with greater dedication, possible in the context of that situation. For example, with greater generosity towards children, or with the decision to make a more intense commitment as a couple for the common good, or with a maturation in family dialogue, or with the development of more frequent and intense reciprocal gestures of charity, etc. .[166] … Therefore, according to Msgr. Fernández, the person who lives in adultery and who has conditions that mitigate his sins that "make it impossible" to implement the commandments must do the good that is possible: with greater generosity towards children, or with the decision to assume in pairs a more intense commitment for the common good, or with a maturation in family dialogue, or with the development of more frequent and intense reciprocal gestures of charity, etc. ...

Msgr. Fernández: “Estos intentos sí pueden ser objetos de una“ personal elección ”, y son ejemplos de ese“ bien posible ”que se puede realizar en los limites de la propia situación (cf. EG 44-45; AL 308). Son expresiones de la "via caritatis", a la que siempre pueden acudir "quienes tengan dificultades para fully living the divine ley" (AL 306). Situándose en esa vía, la conciencia también está llamada a reconocer "aquello que, por ahora, es la

respuesta generosa que se puede ofrecer a Dios [...] the entrega que Dios mismo está reclamando en medio de la complejidad concreta de los limites "(AL 303)." (p. 464) "I translate in an indicative way:" These intentions can be objects of a "personal choice" and are examples of that "possible good" that can be achieved within the limits of the situation one is experiencing. They are expressions of the "via caritatis", which can always follow "those who have difficulty living the divine law fully". Situating itself in this way, the conscience is also called to recognize "what, for now, is the generous response that can be offered to God [...] the commitment that God himself is asking for in the concrete complexity of limits."

For those who are "unable" to live the commandments, the possibility remains open to do a certain good which is the way of "charity" to follow and the conscience can therefore believe that the person can remain in a situation in which he performs objectively serious acts because this it is what God asks of the person in the present….

Obviously these affirmations of Archbishop Fernández, in the line of those he presented above, are discreetly placed outside the sound Catholic doctrine and practically affirm for these "conditioned" people a dispensation from the commandments because for them it is enough to do their good "Possible", and not the Law of God objectively, in this line these "conditioned" people can then receive the Sacraments without proposing to live according to the objective implementation of the commandments[167] ... these statements have opened the doors through which the theologian Fumagalli has passed to declare the lawfulness, in some cases, even of homosexual acts[168] ... and Fumagalli's book, instead of just condemnations ... received the preface of a Bishop very close to the Pope and the publicity of Avvenire ...

That someone has great difficulties, as Msgr. Fernández and the Pope[169] to follow the narrow way of the Cross is normal and it is certainly not for this reason that the narrow way should be widened…. because only the narrow way leads to Heaven!

On the other hand, God gives us grace, charity, the gifts of the Holy Spirit, not to take a simple walk but to live the supernatural life, salvation is not in a natural and easy life but in the supernatural life which is difficult but possible with God's help!

The charity we are talking about in this chapter leads us to follow Christ on the way of the Cross and to hate sin utterly… it makes us ready for martyrdom, let alone if it does not make us overcome the difficulties mentioned by Msgr. Fernández!

The Gospel clearly states that the requests he makes are very demanding and difficult for everyone; if for the fact that there are difficulties he had apologized for practicing them ... practically everyone would be apologized ...

The Catechism states in n. 2072: “Since the ten commandments reveal the fundamental duties of man towards God and towards his neighbor, in their essential content they reveal grave obligations. They are essentially immutable and oblige always and everywhere. Nobody could dispense from them. The ten commandments are engraved by God in the heart of the human being. " … The commandments oblige always and everywhere. Nobody could dispense from them ... and true charity leads us to live according to the commandments, in the s. God's law! The Council of Trent affirms that no one, then, however justified, must consider himself free from the observance of the commandments (can. 20), no one must make his own that reckless expression prohibited by the Fathers under pain of excommunication, that is, it is impossible for the justified man to observe the commandments of God (can. 18 and 22); Indeed, God does not command the impossible; but when he commands he admonishes you to do what you can and to ask for what you cannot, and he helps so that you can: his commandments are not burdensome (1 Jn. 5,3: 11,30), his yoke is gentle and his weight light (Mt .XNUMX). The Council itself adds that if anyone says that even for man justified and constituted in grace the commandments of God are impossible to observe, let him be anathema.[170]

What we have just said about the statements of Msgr. Fernández seems important to us to realize in depth the deviated doctrine found in the "sources" of Amoris Laetitia and therefore of the deviated doctrine that Amoris Laetitia and the letter of the Argentine Bishops present in a real but in a certain way hidden, discreet way.

Msgr. Fernández says precisely with regard to the discretion held by Pope Francis to pass his change of doctrine: "Aunque the cuestión del posible lit a la comune de algunos divorciados en nueva unión has provocado mucho revuelo, el Papa intentó —sin lograrlo— que este paso se diera de a discreet manner. Por eso, después de desarrollar los presupuestos de this decision in the cuerpo of the document, the application to the municipality of the divorce in new unión se hizo explícita en notas a pie de página. "[171] This means that although the question of possible access to communion for some divorced in a new union has caused a stir, the Pope has tried - unsuccessfully - to take this step discreetly. Therefore, after developing the assumptions of this decision in the body of the document, the application to the communion of divorced in a new union was made explicit in the footnotes.

h) Clear indications that lead us to believe that the Pope puts aside the doctrine according to which the negative norms of divine law are obligatory always and in all circumstances.

In line with the statements of Msgr. Fernández at no. 303 of Amoris Laetitia we read: «But this conscience can recognize not only that a situation does not objectively respond to the general proposal of the Gospel; he can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for the moment is the generous response that can be offered to God, and discover with a certain moral certainty that this is the gift that God himself is requesting in the midst of the concrete complexity of limits, although not is still fully the objective ideal ". (Amoris Laetitia 303)

At no. 304 of Amoris Laetitia we read: "A small passage, in the midst of great human limitations, can be more pleasing to God than the outwardly correct life of one who spends his days without facing important difficulties" (Amoris Laetitia 304)

At no. 304 of Amoris Laetitia we also read: "It is petty to pause to consider only whether or not the action of a person responds to a law or a general norm, because this is not enough to discern and to ensure full fidelity to God in concrete existence of a human being ".

In Amoris Laetitia n. 305 we read: “Discernment must help to find possible ways of responding to God and of growth across limits. Believing that everything is black or white, we sometimes close the path of grace and growth and discourage paths of sanctification that give glory to God ”(Amoris Laetitia 305).

Amoris Laetitia affirms "To avoid any deviant interpretation, I remember that in no way should the Church renounce proposing the full ideal of marriage, the plan of God in all its greatness ... Lukewarmness, any form of relativism, or an excessive comparison with the moment to propose it, would be a lack of fidelity to the Gospel and also a lack of love of the Church towards the young people themselves. Understanding exceptional situations never implies hiding the light of the fullest ideal or proposing less than what Jesus offers to the human being. " (Amoris Laetitia n.307)

In Amoris Laetitia we read, at n. 308: "But I sincerely believe that Jesus wants a Church attentive to the good that the Spirit pours out in the midst of fragility: a Mother who, at the very moment in which she clearly expresses her objective teaching," does not renounce the possible good, although she runs the risk to get dirty with the mud of the road ". [...] .."

Let us note first of all what the Pope says: he speaks of an ideal, of a conscience that can recognize not only that a situation does not respond objectively to the general proposal of the Gospel but can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for the moment is the generous response that is can offer to God, and discover with a certain moral certainty that this is the donation that God himself is requesting in the midst of the concrete complexity of limits ... he says that we must not give up the possible good and that a small step, in the midst of great human limitations , it may be more pleasing to God ... he says it is petty to pause to consider only whether or not a person's actions respond to a law or a general norm ... he says that we must help people find possible ways of responding to God and of growth through limits and that believing that everything is black or white, we sometimes close the path of grace and growth ... Furthermore, as we have seen, the Pope quotes a Thomist text that pre he hears some statements about the natural law and says that the more you go into the particular, the more you find indeterminacy ... he quotes a text from the Theological Commission for which the natural law cannot therefore be presented as an already constituted set of rules that are imposed a priori on the moral subject , but it is a source of objective inspiration for his eminently personal decision-making process ...

Now let's see what the Pope does not report: he does not report the texts of St. Thomas, who affirm the existence of norms that are obligatory always and in all circumstances, does not report texts by St. Thomas on faith which highlights how it makes us participate on a supernatural level in the light of divine Truth, does not report the Veritatis Splendor and other texts that clearly affirm the existence of norms that are always mandatory and in all circumstances does not report the affirmations of the Theology Commission on the revealed Law and on the faith connected to it ... Then we note that the Pope did not respond to the dubia, among which one specifically concerned Amoris Laetitia 304 as seen above, therefore the Pope has not confirmed that: "... continues to be valid, after the post-synodal exhortation “Amoris laetitia” (cf. n. 304), the teaching of the encyclical of St. John Paul II “Veritatis splendor” n. 79, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, on the existence of absolute moral norms, valid without exception, which prohibit intrinsically evil acts? "[172]...

We saw above that for Msgr. Fernández in some cases the negative norms of the Law of God can be lawfully broken in fact this author states that in the context of the lawful law of graduality the negative precepts of the Law of God can be lawfully violated[173] … In the footsteps of Msgr. Fernández also Amoris Laetitia, as we are seeing, discreetly puts aside the validity of the doctrine that the negative norms of the Decalogue are obligatory always and in all circumstances.

It seems to me important to note in this line, as we have already seen, that professor Josef Seifert published an article in the 2/2016 issue of the German journal of philosophy and theology AEMAET entitled "Amoris laetitia: joy, sadness and hopes", in which he states : "I think that some passages of AL, especially those that are likely to have the greatest impact, are a cause of great concern, not only because they can easily lead to misunderstandings and abuses in their application, but also because - at least in appearance - they enter into decisive conflict with the Word of God and the teaching of the Church regarding the moral order, intrinsically disordered actions, divine commandments, and our ability to fulfill them with the help of divine grace, from the indissolubility of marriage, to the sanctity of the sacraments of 'Eucharist and Marriage, to eternal salvation (hell) and to the sacramental and pastoral discipline of the Church which comes from the Word of God and from 2000 XNUMX years of the Church's sacred tradition "[174].

On 5 August 2017, in the German theological magazine AEMAET, professor Josef Seifert published an article with the title posed in the form of a question: "Does pure logic threaten to destroy the entire moral doctrine of the Church?". In it he stated that the aforementioned n ° 303 of Amoris Laetitia is "a theological atomic bomb that threatens to tear down the entire moral edifice of the 10 commandments and of Catholic moral teaching". And he justified the dramatic nature of the statement by asking himself:

“If only one case of an intrinsically immoral act can be permitted and even willed by God, does this not apply to all acts considered 'intrinsically wrong'? … Therefore, should the other 9 commandments, Humanae Vitae, Evangelium Vitae and all the past, present or future documents of the Church, dogmas or councils, which teach the existence of intrinsically wrong acts, not also have to fall? ... They should not then, by pure logic, be good and commendable due to the complexity of a concrete situation, euthanasia, suicide or assistance to it,

lies, theft, perjury, denial or betrayal of Christ, such as that of St. Peter or

murder, in some circumstances and after adequate "discernment"?

…. However, if the question contained in the title of this document must have a

yes, as I personally believe is the case, the consequence purely

logic of Amoris Laetitia's statement seems to destroy the whole teaching

morality of the Church. "[175]

The professor. Meiattini added, in Seifert's line: "... the assertion that in certain cases God can even" ask "to commit an objective evil, because, in a given moment, it is the only thing that can be generously offered to Him ( no. 303). Here Seifert is right: if the meaning of that expression in AL is this, and I don't see what else it could be, then the whole Christian morality collapses. Basically this affirmation contains the presuppositions of a neognostic thought that at other times the Pope (and more recently the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) rightly says he wants to reject. Because if God positively asks for evil, the dimension of the "shadow", of the negative, is placed in God himself. If it can be God who asks what is bad, in certain concrete conditions, because it is what a person can do at that moment, then it would be AL who creates a crack in a certain form of neognosticism, very present in certain cultural currents. "[176]

These reflections by Meiattini and Seifert hit the mark… unfortunately! In the footsteps of Msgr. Fernández also Amoris Laetitia, as we are seeing, discreetly puts aside the validity of the doctrine that the negative norms of the Decalogue are obligatory always and in all circumstances.

... precisely because Seifert's statements evidently hit the mark ... it was "good" for the "paradigm shift" to remove it.

The famous professor Seifert was turned away from teaching in the Diocese of Granada[177]

We add that, significantly, in this line, in recent years the Pope has removed from the John Paul II Institute the professors Melina and Noriega Bastos who strongly reaffirmed the existence of absolute moral norms, valid without exception, which prohibit intrinsically evil acts ... in their place he called in their place the theologian Chiodi was called among others[178], of the first prof. Granados states: “Now there are rumors that Professor Maurizio Chiodi will come to teach, who opens up to the lawfulness of contraception and admits homosexual acts as“ possible ”in certain situations. "[179] ...

The Pope did not respond to the filial plea that many faithful have addressed to him and in which it is stated: "In fact, we note a generalized disorientation caused by the possibility that a breach is opened within the Church such as to allow adultery - following the access to the Eucharist of divorced and civilly remarried couples - and even a virtual acceptance of same-sex unions. "[180]

During this pontificate, moreover, His Eminence De Kesel, one of the cardinals created by Pope Francis, affirmed, very significantly: "The condemnation of homosexual acts is no longer sustainable".[181] ... the Holy See did not intervene to condemn these statements ...

Also during this Pontificate: "Cardinal Gracias publicly expressed the opinion that homosexuality could be an orientation given to men by God. Pope Francis made him one of the organizers of the Vatican summit on sexual abuse in February 2019."[182] ... the Holy See did not intervene to condemn these statements ...

The Pope did not condemn the theologian Fumagalli, who also relied on Amoris Laetitia, who declared the lawfulness, in some cases, even of homosexual acts[183] ... indeed, Fumagalli's book, instead of just condemnations ... received the preface of a Bishop, now a Cardinal, very close to the Pope and received the advertisement of Avvenire, the newspaper of the Italian Bishops ... the Pope did not condemn the Dominican Oliva for the openings made by him in favor of homosexual acts in the book "Amours" (Editions du Cerf, 2015) ... We will talk about these two texts in favor of homosexual acts in the chapter in which we will talk about the openings that are being implemented through Amoris Laetitia in order to legitimize the acts homosexuals and precisely in this chapter we will find many other significant passages in the line we are seeing ... Also significant appears in this line a catechesis of Pope Francis held on 18.8.2021, in it he said: “And also the second: do I disdain the Commandments? No. I observe them, but not as absolute, because I know that what justifies me is Jesus Christ. " (Pope Francis "General audience" 18.8.2021 www.vatican.va https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/it/audiences/2021/documents/papa-francesco_20210818_udienza-generale.html) The commandments are not absolute … Note well.

All this allows us to conclude quite clearly that the current Pope is indeed working to put aside, and consider no longer valid, the doctrine about the existence of absolute moral norms, valid without exception, which prohibit intrinsically evil acts (such as adultery and homosexual acts) ... obviously this action that the Pope is carrying out has no real foundation in the Bible and in Tradition.

The Bible and Tradition clearly and precisely affirm the opposite of what the Pope spreads.

I add that in reality what I have just said also emerges from a more in-depth examination of Amoris Laetitia n. 304 in fact the Pope first affirms with s. Thomas: "... the more the uncertainty increases the more one goes into the particular". " ... then he adds that: "... the general norms ... in their formulation cannot absolutely embrace all particular situations." then he says: "At the same time it must be said that, precisely for this reason, what is part of a practical discernment before a particular situation cannot be raised to the level of a norm."

It seems evident that the message that passes is that of an indeterminacy for which the doctrine on the existence of absolute moral norms, valid without exception, which prohibits intrinsically evil acts and which in this sense radically resolve many cases of morality is no longer valid ... The same openness that the Pope makes to the absolution and Communion of those who do not propose not to sin gravely and in particular not to commit adultery, and therefore accept to perform an intrinsically evil act, contrary to a negative precept of the revealed Law, a further papal indication appears to set aside the doctrine regarding the absolute obligation of the negative precepts of the Decalogue and the connected norms of the natural law.

I point out that putting aside the biblical and traditional doctrine according to which there are absolute moral norms, valid without exception, which prohibit intrinsically evil acts, practically means affirming that in some cases it is permissible to commit adultery, in some cases it is permissible to perform homosexual acts, but it also means practically affirming that in some cases it is lawful to kill the innocent, it also means affirming that in some cases it is lawful to rape, it also means affirming that in some cases it is lawful to commit pedophilia, it also means affirming that in some cases it is lawful to massacre etc. etc. which is obviously absurd and immoral ... and in fact the line followed by Pope Francis of openness, discreet, to the legitimacy in some cases of intrinsically evil, objectively serious acts, is absurd and contrary to Catholic morality.

In conclusion, in Amoris Laetitia n. 304s the Pope discreetly sets aside the Magisterium of Veritatis Splendor n. 52 and other papal texts, sets aside the true Thomist doctrine on the Decalogue, sets aside the revealed divine law with its clear indispensability and its absolute obligation, especially as regards the negative precepts, and therefore sets aside the doctrine concerning the existence of absolute moral norms, valid without exception, which prohibit intrinsically evil acts fixed in the negative precepts of the divine law.

It is not the first time that the Pope and his collaborators put aside "annoying" "teachers" of sound doctrine: they did it with Card. Burke, they did it with Card. Muller (who, despite some errors, tries to reiterate sound doctrine) ...

In this regard, the question of the famous prof. Rist to Card. Cupich after the latter had spoken of a "paradigm shift": "Your Eminence, based on your account of the solar, thoughtful and holistic aspects of Pope Francis' revolution of mercy - described in a disturbing manner by the leaflet of this meeting and by His Eminence as a "paradigm shift" in the announcement of Catholicism - and on the Pope's request for a free and frank discussion about his provocative proposals and tactics, I would like to ask why Pope Francis acts so ruthlessly in insulting and eliminating doctrinal opponents:

Cardinal Burke removed from command of the Roman Rota;

Three faithful CDF priests were dismissed without explanation, followed by the abrupt termination of Cardinal Mueller himself;

The denial of the cardinal's hat to the much loved champion of the unborn, Archbishop Chaput;

Removal of most of the original Academy for Life members;

Cardinal Pell's apparent "riverside sale", which may have been framed;

And more recently, the exile from Rome of the professor of patristics in the Lateran and editor of the difficult book Remain in the truth of Christ;

The list can go on and on, but I stop here to ask again if harsh actions of this kind - combined with the well-documented rigging of the Synod on the Family - indicate that the Pope's "paradigm shift" should be recognized as an attempt - under the pretext of offering solutions to authentic social problems in Western society - of imposing radical changes of doctrine on the Church, developed not by the laity but largely in Germany by a group of relativist Hegelian theologians? "[184]

It is not, therefore, the first time that the Pope and his collaborators put aside "annoying" "teachers" of sound doctrine: they did it with Card. Burke, they did it with Card. Müller (who, even with some errors, tries to reaffirm the sound doctrine)…, they did it by not answering the dubia, they did it with prof. Melina and prof. Noriega; but through Amoris Laetitia, and in particular through nos. 304-5, Pope Francis has discreetly put aside the sound Thomist doctrine, the traditional doctrine, the Magisterium, the faith and even the positive divine law, that is, he has put aside in particular s. Thomas, and his predecessor saints Popes, Tradition, faith, true charity… and God!

God intervene and very soon.

6) Charity does not lead to adultery; the N. 301 of Amoris Laetitia quotes s. Thomas to affirm the opposite of what the saint says.

a) No. 301 of the Amoris Laetitia.

At no. 301 of Amoris Laetitia we read that a "special discernment is necessary in some situations called" irregular "" because the "Church has a solid reflection on the conditioning and mitigating circumstances" that make venial sins objectively serious. The limits that make certain acts venial can be of various kinds: ignorance, difficulty in understanding the "values ​​inherent in the moral norm" (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris consortio (22 November 1992), 33: AAS 74 (1982) , 121), situations that do not allow "to act differently and to take other decisions without a new fault"; here Pope Francis inserts some quotations from St. Thomas Aquinas for which: "someone can have grace and charity, but without being able to exercise some of the virtues well" (Cfr Summa Theologiae I-II, q. 65, a. 3, ad 2; De malo, q. 2, a. 2.) and "It is said that some saints do not have certain virtues, given the difficulties they experience in their acts, [...] although they have the habit of all the virtues ". (Ibid., Ad 3.)"

God enlighten us and his truth shine in this book.

It seems to me important to note first of all something very important that does not emerge from the Pope's words: the Church possesses a monumental reflection on the immutability of certain moral principles and a monumental reflection on the lack of exceptions to them…. Tradition has never stated that it is lawful to commit adultery or blaspheme…. nor does it affirm that it is lawful to receive sacramental absolution if one does not have the intention not to commit adultery, contrary to what Amoris Laetitia affirms!

The Pope uses words and quotations very carefully to convey his message of "paradigm shift" and therefore the betrayal of sound doctrine ... so it is very important not to be carried away simply by his speeches but to keep sound doctrine in mind, underlining well what he does not say and deepening what the great Catholic Doctors really want to say, such as St. Thomas, whom he cites, they in fact followed sound doctrine but the Pope uses it at least in some cases to present teachings that deviate from sound doctrine.

Precisely to understand well what s. Thomas on the subject for which he is quoted by the Pope, and therefore to understand the strategy used by the Pope himself through these quotations, in the following pages I will pause to study in depth first of all what the Doctor really means in I-II, q. 65, a. 3, ad 2-3 and De malo, q. 2, a. 2, texts cited in n. 301 of Amoris Laetitia, I will study other aspects of the aforementioned number 301 of this exhortation to be examined later in fact in the next volume I will devote an entire chapter to the question of extenuating circumstances.

It may be interesting for those who are about to read the following pages to consult an article by prof. Pakaluk[185] which can be a useful critical introduction to Amoris Laetitia ...

Christ reign.

b) What did s really mean. Thomas with his comment (I-II, q. 65, a. 3, ad 3) on the words of s. Bede quoted in Amoris Laetitia 301; examination of "parallel" passages in the works of the s. Doctor.

 

 

God enlighten us better and better.

The affirmation of St. Thomas, which Amoris Laetitia reports in n. 301, for which: "It is said that some saints do not have certain virtues, given the difficulties they experience in their acts, [...] although they have the habit of all the virtues" (I-II q. 65 a. 3 ad 3.) ”, if we examine it carefully starting from the initial objection (arg. 3) it is a comment by s. Thomas one step away from the works of s. Bede and this passage with its commentary is certainly found in two other writings of the Angelico: the Commentary on the Sentences and the De Virtutibus.

To examine I-II well, q. 65, a. 3, ad 3 it seems to me, therefore, important first of all to make a clarification on holiness according to the doctrine of St. Thomas and then see what the s. Doctor affirms in the texts "parallel" to this passage, that is precisely in the Commentary on the Sentences and in the De Virtutibus, and therefore to examine the whole article 3 of q. 65 of I-II; later we will see what s. Thomas more specifically in I-II, q. 65, a. 3, to 2; De malo, q. 2, a. 2., my reflections will follow.

Who is the saint for s. Thomas Aquinas? Obviously for a Catholic Doctor like him, holy is above all God and therefore the one who participates in a high way in the holiness of God, such participation takes place through grace and charity, through such participation the Trinitarian life and the Trinity itself is in man. and he guides him towards Heaven, he guides him, in particular, on the way of the Bible and of the Gospel… that is, on the way of the Law and the commandments.

It says more precisely s. Thomas: “Ad quartum dicendum, quod, sicut dicit Dionysius, sanctitas est ab omni immunditia Libera et perfecta et immaculata munditia; et ideo convenienter sanctitas spiritualitati adjungitur, quae etiam a materialitate separationem dicit, ut sic per spiritualitatem designetur separatio a materia, et per sanctitatem a materiabus defectibus. … Et ideo convenienter sanctitas, quae rectitudinem voluntatis importat, adjungitur processioni amoris, et non generationi, quae est opus naturae. " (Super Sent., Lib. 1 d. 10 q. 1 a. 4 ad 4.)

The saint is therefore the one who lives in absolute purity and freedom from defects, in the rectitude of the will.

Continue s. Thomas: ”Respondeo dicendum, quod, sicut dicit Dionysius, sanctitas est ab omni immunditia libero et perfecta et immaculata munditia; unde cum sanctificari sit sanctum fieri, oportet quod sanctificatio emundationem ab immunditia spiritual ponat, prout nunc de sanctificatione loquimur. Emundatio autem a spiritual macula, scilicet culpa, sine gratia esse non potest, sicut et tenebra non nisi per lucem fugatur; unde sanctificatio tantum ad eos pertinet qui gratiae capaces sunt ... "(Super Sent., lib. 3 d. 3 q. 1 a. 1 qc. 1 co.)

The purity of which Dionysius speaks and with him St. Thomas regarding the saint is purity from sin and life in grace, which is the divine Trinitarian life in us and implies the Trinitarian indwelling in our souls.

It still says yes. Thomas: "... sanctitas est scientia faciens fideles et servantes quae ad Deum justa sunt." (Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 33 q. 3 a. 4 qc. 6 co.) ... and further the Angelic Doctor states: "... Nullus enim privatur totaliter sanctitate nisi per peccatum mortale." (II-II, q. 111 a. 4 co.) The sinful death alone totally cancels holiness in us (cf. also I, q. 63 a. 9 ad 3)

The grace that makes us saints makes God dwell in us: ”Respondeo dicendum quod per gratiam gratum facientem tota Trinitas inhabitat mentem, secundum illud Ioan. XIV, ad eum veniemus, et mansionem apud eum faciemus. "(Summa Theologiae I, q. 43 a. 5 co.)

These quotations must make us understand that the saint, according to St. Thomas, therefore, is a man in whom the Trinity lives by grace, he is, therefore, a man guided by God, he is a man who has charity and all the virtues, he is a man in whom God manifests himself with his holiness .

In the Commentary on the Sentences by Pietro Lombardo we read:

“Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod virtutes gratuitoe non sint connexae. Beda enim dicit, quod sancti magis humiliantur de virtutibus quas non habent, quam de virtutibus quas habent, glorientur. Ergo habent aliquas virtutes et aliquas non habent. "(Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 36 q. 1 a. 2 arg. 1) The answer to this argumentum is the following" Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod verbum Bedae intelligendum est de virtutibus quantum ad usus, et non quantum ad habitus. Different enim sancti diversimode excedunt se invicem in usibus diversarum virtutum, secundum quod de quolibet confessor dictum est: non est inventus similis illi qui conservaret legem excelsi. "

(Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 36 q. 1 a. 2 ad 1)

In De Virtutibus we read: “Dicit enim Beda super Lucam, quod sancti magis humiliantur de virtutibus quas non habent, quam extollantur de virtutibus quas habent. Ergo quasdam habent, et quasdam non habent; non ergo virtutes sunt connexae. " (De virtutibus, q. 5 a. 2 arg. 1.)

The answer to this argumentum is the following: “Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod propter inclinationem quae est ex natura, vel ex aliquo dono gratiae, quam habet aliquis magis ad opus unius virtutis quam alterius contingit quod aliquis promptior est ad actum unius virtutis quam alterius; et secundum hoc dicuntur sancti aliquas virtutes habere, ad quarum actus magis sunt prompti, et aliquas non habere, ad quas sunt minus prompti. " (De virtutibus, q. 5 a. 2 ad 1)

Let's examine what s says below. Thomas in these two texts and later we will examine more directly his statements in the Theological Sum.

In the Commentary on the Sentences s. Thomas explains that the statement of St. Bede must be understood as regards the use and not as regards the habit of virtue according to the fact that the different saints surpass each other in various ways in the use of the different virtues; this means that the saints, while being perfect and working as perfect, humble themselves for their lack of supreme perfection. St. Alphonsus M. de Liguori explains in this regard: “The souls who are truly humble, because they are more enlightened by the divine light, since they know more about the divine perfections, so they see their miseries and sins more; therefore the saints, with all that they led a life so exemplary and so different from worldly men, also called themselves, not by exaggeration, but with true feeling, the greatest sinners who lived in the world. " [186]

In the De Virtutibus s. Thomas states that the expression of St. Bede, according to which the saints humble themselves more for the virtues they do not have than for what they glory in the virtues they have, means that they are more ready to perform certain acts of virtue than for others.

In this text and in that of the Commentary on the Sentences, therefore, it is clear for himself. Thomas that the saints have all the virtues and are not adulterers, nor fornicators, nor murderers but the sentence of St. Bede indicates that although the saint is perfect, he is not supremely perfect and in fact humbles himself for his lack of supreme perfection rather than boasting of the perfection he has achieved.

Before going on to examine the text of the Somma Theologica we must note that the text of De Virtutibus is certainly subsequent to the Commentary on the Sentences and that it is probably contemporary or subsequent to the text of I-II that we are about to see; it should also be emphasized that s. Thomas speaks of saints, that is, he speaks of people who have charity and an eminent charity…. and in charity there are all the virtues, as St. Thomas himself in the text of the Supreme Theological that the Pope quoted in Amoris Laetitia and which I now reproduce in its entirety below.

c) In-depth examination of the text of I-II q. 65 a. 3 quoted by Amoris Laetitia and clarifications.

 

 

The complete article of the Somma Theologica that the Pope quoted in part in Amoris Laetitia can be read by all free of charge at this site: http://www.corpusthomisticum.org/sth2055.html. The Holy Doctor wonders at the beginning of this article whether charity can be without the other moral virtues. His answer is the following: “Respondeo dicendum quod cum caritate simul infunduntur omnes virtutes morales. ”And he adds that:“… oportet quod cum caritate simul infundantur omnes virtutes morales, quibus homo perficit singula generates bonorum operum. Et sic patet quod virtutes morales infusae non solum habent connexionem propter prudentiam; sed etiam propter caritatem. Et quod qui amittit caritatem per peccatum mortale, amittit omnes virtutes morales infusas. "(Iª-IIae q. 65 a. 3)

From what St. Thomas it is evident that charity is united with all the infused moral virtues. Those who have charity therefore have with it all the moral virtues.

The second objection (arg. 2) affirms, following Aristotle, that many who have charity, and are without grave sin, do not have the other virtues because they suffer difficulties in the works of these virtues, and they are not pleasant to them in themselves, but only insofar as they are referred to charity, therefore charity can exist without the other moral virtues.

Answering s. Thomas explains that sometimes it happens, due to a difficulty that arises from the outside, that whoever owns a suit suffers difficulty in working, and therefore does not feel pleasure and satisfaction in the act. In this line it may happen that a person, despite having the habit of science, has difficulty in understanding, due to drowsiness or due to an illness. In a similar way, sometimes the habits of the infused moral virtues suffer difficulties in working, owing to some contrary dispositions left by the preceding acts. This difficulty does not occur equally in the moral virtues acquired: since through the exercise of the acts, with which they were acquired, even the contrary dispositions were removed. (Cfr. Iª-IIae q. 65 a. 3 ad 2)

Here it must be emphasized that the objection (arg. 2) is fundamentally wrong because it applies to the infused virtues the same characteristics as the acquired virtues. But there is an abysmal difference between the two types of virtues and their characteristics are quite different. The infused virtues are virtues that are united with sanctifying grace and therefore with our supernatural participation in divine life and make us supernaturally participate in the divine perfections and make us walk on the way of the Cross .. they, as St. Thomas, unlike the acquired virtues, can suffer difficulties in working.

In the third objection it is affirmed that charity is in all saints, but there are saints who lack some virtue: in fact, St. Bede affirms that the more saints humble themselves for the virtues they do not have, than they boast about the virtues. that they have, therefore it is not necessary that those who have charity have all the moral virtues.
St. Thomas replies by specifying that it is said that some saints do not have certain virtues for the reason already mentioned in the answer to the second objection, that is, for the difficulties they experience in their acts, due to the contrary dispositions left by the previous acts. But in reality the saints have the habit of all the virtues. (cfr. Iª-IIae q. 65 a. 3 ad 3) Therefore the saints have all the virtues with charity. The saints have all the virtues infused even if some acts of them perform them with difficulty ... but they perform them when they have to do them! I emphasize that for s. Thomas, as seen, the negative commandments can never be violated ... and that s. Thomas affirms that with regard to the saints it is said ("dicuntur") that they do not have the virtues and that "dicuntur" is extremely illuminating, he means that the affirmation of s. Bede is a way of saying that does not correspond to the full truth of things. The saints, according to the affirmations of St. Thomas in this passage have the infused virtues and perform their acts even if with difficulty.

Saints work according to truth. In this text of the Sum Theological, therefore, the s. Doctor follows more directly what he affirmed in De Virtutibus: the saints are more ready to perform certain virtuous works than for others; for s. Thomas, it is good to reiterate it, it is clear that the saints have all the virtues and the sentence of St. Basically, Bede says that the saints enlightened by God and contemplating his perfection, feel the weakness of their virtues and commit themselves to grow in them as s very well explains. Alphonsus: “The souls who are truly humble, because they are more enlightened by the divine light, since they know the divine perfections more, so they see their miseries and sins more; therefore the saints, with all that they led a life so exemplary and so different from worldly men, also called themselves, not by exaggeration, but with true feeling, the greatest sinners who lived in the world. ".[187]

Dom G. Meiattini states regarding the passage from Amoris Laetitia in which the article of the Summa Theologica (Iª-IIae q. 65 a. 3) quoted above is quoted: "Now, use this passage of the Summa concerning a relative deficit of good and virtue in those who live not only in the law of God (without mortal sin), but even in holiness, to try to shed light on the situation of those who positively violate a divine command (that is, objectively contradict the law) is completely inappropriate . ... To quote this passage from Thomas almost as if to support the equivalence between imperfect virtue and objective condition of sin that is subjectively less or completely not guilty, for mitigating circumstances of various types, seems to me a real metabasis eis allos ghenos and collides with the teaching overall of Thomas…. "[188]

d) What does the text of St. Tommaso De Malo, q. 2, a. 2 and why it is quoted together with I-II q. 65 a. 3?

Let's see the text of De malo, q. 2, a. 2., the article is long, so I will only quote the salient passages. First of all, the article has as its title a question “… quaeritur utrum peccatum consistat in actu voluntatis tantum” one wonders if sin consists only in an act of will and in the body the s. Doctor responds by saying “Qui vero considerverunt in sin solum id unde habet rationem culpae, dixerunt peccatum in sola voluntate consistere. Sed oportet in sin consider non solum ipsam deformitatem, sed etiam actum deformitati substratum; quia peccatum non est deformitas, sed actus deformis. Deformitas autem actus est per hoc quod discordat a debita regula rationis vel legis Dei. Quae quidem deformitas invenitur non solum in actu interior, sed etiam exterior. Sed tamen hoc ipsum quod actus exterior deformis imputatur homini ad culpam, est a voluntate. " In the article then s. Thomas specifies: “… voluntate producitur non solum actus interior quem voluntas elicit, sed etiam actus exterior quem voluntas imperat; et ita etiam hoc ipsum quod exteri actu peccatur, voluntate peccatur. "(ibid. ad 1)

St. Thomas essentially replies to the initial question by saying that sin is a deformed act that disagrees with the rule of reason or the divine law, this deformity is found not only in the interior act but also in the exterior one but it is the will that produces the inner act and the outer act which is dominated by the will. The interior act of the will is therefore the cause of the exterior act. In some cases the external act and the internal one form a single sin but if the person first committed an internal sin only and then, willingly, also performed the external act, they are two sins. (Ibid. Ad 11)

We point out that the two texts, I-II q. 65 a. 3 and De Malo q. 2 a. 2 are parts of articles in which very different things are dealt with since one speaks of the relationship between charity and moral virtues and in the other one speaks of the relationship between sin and will. The Pope quotes these texts from St. Thomas, in Amoris Laetitia n. 301, speaking of the extenuating circumstances, after having said: "Saint Thomas Aquinas already recognized that someone can have grace and charity, but without being able to exercise some of the virtues well."

e) The Pope quotes St. Thomas to let something pass that the same s. Thomas condemns.

The Pope quotes these texts from St. Thomas, in Amoris Laetitia n. 301, speaking of extenuating circumstances. These texts should justify the statements made earlier by the Pope in n. 301. ... and they should ultimately justify the administration of the Sacrament of Confession and Communion to those who live in adultery and who have no intention of not committing adultery, therefore they are not contrite for such sins ... as can be seen from the letter of the Argentine Bishops approved by the Pope where he states: "Si llega a reconocer que, in a concrete case, hay limitaciones que atenúan la responsabilidad y la culpabilidad (cf. hijos de la nueva unión, Amoris laetitia abre la posibilidad del access to the sacramentos de la Reconciliación y la Eucaristía (cf. notas 301 and 302). Estos a su vez disponen a the person to follow madurando y creciendo con la fuerza de la gracia. "[189] As can be seen, in this passage the Argentine Bishops cite Amoris Laetitia n. 301 ...

The Pope's statements and the quotation from St. Thomas we are examining should also open the door for the "paradigm shift".

…. think in particular of what Card. Kasper said  [190]

…. just think of what was stated by Cardinal Coccopalmerio[191] , by a theologian who applies the affirmations of Cardinal Coccopalmerio [192] … And by Bishop Elbs[193]… Think of what an interesting article by S. Magister says  [194]

Think of the openings that the "paradigm shift" is making in terms of legitimizing homosexual acts ... as I said above ... therefore:

- Cardinal Reinhard Marx declared: “Up until now, these two issues had been absolutely non-negotiable. Although they failed to obtain a two-thirds majority, the majority of the Synod Fathers still voted in their favor. "

"They are still part of the text," continued Marx. “I asked the Pope in particular about this, and the Pope said he wanted all the points published along with all the voting results. He wanted everyone in the church to see where we were. No, this Pope has opened the doors wide and the vote will not change the results at the end of the synod “.[195]

- the journalist Moia was able to write a significant article in the newspaper of the Italian Bishops[196];

- the Pope has problems meeting a woman, an activist opposed to same-sex marriage, who also had 4 marriages (with men) on his shoulders, but he does not hesitate to meet known homosexuals[197].

- equally the Pope does not mind having one of his s reads. Masses a pro LGBT activist, with great scandal[198].

- the Pope does not censor and indeed "promotes" Fr. Martin SJ who even celebrates s. Pre-gay pride mass according to which: Pope Francis has LGBT friends and has appointed many i, archbishops and bishops who support the LGBT world[199], Fr. Martin was received by the Pope in October 2019 and about a month later he stated that in this meeting the Pope encouraged him to continue his ministry to LGBT Catholics, in an article by S. Paciolla significantly entitled: " A photo that certifies a "paradigm shift" "[200] and which concerns precisely the meeting of October 2019 between the Pope and Fr. Martin, the journalist explains that: “… Cardinal Robert. Sarah, in an editorial on the WSJ, called Father Martin "one of the most outspoken critics of the Church's message regarding sexuality", Cardinal Burke, in an interview with The Wanderer, said that what Father Martin said "is not consistent with the Church's teaching "on homosexuality, the Archbishop of Philadelphia, Msgr. Charles Chaput, recently wrote that Father Martin "misrepresents the Catholic creed", Bishop Thomas John Paprocki, of the diocese of Springfield, on 19 September issued a statement in which, among other things, it is said that "Public messages by Father Martin create confusion among the faithful and upset the unity of the Church, promoting the false sense that immoral sexual behavior is acceptable under God's law. "[201] … Pope Francis evidently leaves him free to speak and does not censor the erroneous and scandalous statements of Fr. Martin ... and indeed encourages him to continue his work!

- one of the last cardinals created by Pope Francis is Msgr. Mendonça, we read the following about him: “known for being a fan of Sister Maria Teresa Forcades i Vila, ultra-feminist 'theologian' who advocates abortion and homosexual 'marriage'. Precisely in the preface to a book by Forcades the neo-e argues that "Jesus of Nazareth neither codified nor established rules". Furthermore, in an interview in 2016 he exalted Bergoglio by contrasting him with the "traditionalists". "[202], the words of this theologian Forcades seem significant in this line: "Pope Francis I think he tried to take a step forward in this direction with the synod of the family, he failed to do so but it is not the same atmosphere as when there was no Pope Francis. For example, Sister Jeannine Gramick, who has worked for many years in the United States for the acceptance not only of being homosexual but also of homosexual activity, of physical homosexual love, said that since Pope Francis arrived she has not had any more the pressure he suffered before not to carry out this type of apostolate ”.[203]

- His Eminence De Kesel, one of the cardinals created by Pope Francis, said: "The condemnation of homosexual acts is no longer sustainable".[204] I am not aware that the Holy See intervened to correct the statements of this Cardinal ...

- "In the 2015 Synod on the Family, Cardinal Cupich supported the proposal to allow people living in adulterous relationships and sexually active homosexuals to receive the Eucharist in good conscience, in some circumstances, Pope Francis appointed him Archbishop of Chicago in 2014, cardinal in 2016, and member of the Congregation of Bishops and of the Congregation for Catholic Education. "[205], the words of Cardinal Cupich also go along this line, according to which in his Diocese it is not foreseen that the Sacraments be denied to those who are known to live in homosexual union [206], THE POPE, I stress, significantly, HAS NOT CONDEMNED all THESE ERRORS concerning homosexuality, AS HIS DUTY, but, Rather, IN VARIOUS CASES, HAS SUPPORTED AND PROMOTED, as seen, THOSE WHO SPREAD THEM;

- several Bishops and theologians are supporting the legitimacy of blessings to homosexual couples ... and the Holy See after having condemned, very late, these blessings has not taken any real and strong measures against those who support these theological aberrations and that in some cases have done them ... or continue to do them ... so theologians and Pastors who are in favor of homosexuality and the blessings of homosexual couples are fully active in their "apostolate" in the parishes and seminaries and therefore in the dissemination of their errors on this point of doctrine [207] ...

- as we saw a little above through Amoris Laetitia, the Pope practically cancels the doctrine according to which the negative precepts of the Decalogue are obligatory always and in all circumstances ... and obviously this can be valid or also applies to the prohibition of impure homosexual acts;

- etc. etc.

Amoris Laetitia (with its n. 301) is precisely the instrument for the implementation of the "paradigm shift", as Cardinal Baldisseri had already said: "And in fact, not so much the Synod, it will be important, but the synthesis which will be prepared, and which will be signed by the Pope as a "Post-Synodal Exhortation". It is very likely that it will not be a clear and definitive text, but based on a "floating" interpretation. So that each reading it, can pull it to the side that suits them most. " [208]

The final document, I stress, had to be unclear and definitive, but based on a “floating” interpretation, so that each reading it, can pull it to the side that suits them most…. for the realization of the "paradigm shift" ...

All this is radically contrary to the teaching of St. Thomas and the Pope wants to make it happen by relying on quotations from St. Tommaso… it seems obvious to me that s is used. Thomas improperly to pass what he really is. Thomas and sound doctrine absolutely condemn.

The quotes from s. Thomas appear as "smoke in the eyes" which serves to legitimize, to open the doors "with regard to what he really is. Thomas does not admit and that, on the contrary, he condemns. God intervene!

With regard more specifically to the extenuating circumstances and therefore to n. 301 it must be said that, as we will see better later, especially in the next volume, they are one of the "main ways" used by the Pope to implement the "paradigm shift". In this regard, the Pope adopts a very astute strategy: to pass the subversion of sound doctrine through an ambiguous and imprecise treatment of the extreme cases of moral theology (precisely the mitigating circumstances and the relative discernment).

Mons. Fernandez, presumed hidden author of Amoris Laetitia, wrote commenting on Amoris laetitia: “Pero su acento está puesto más bien en la cuestión de la eventual

disminución de la responsabilidad y de la culpabilidad. Los condicionamientos pueden atenuar o cancel la responsabilidad y la culpabilidad frente a cualquier norm, aun frente a los preceptos

negativos ya las normas morales absolutas. Ello hace posible que no siempre se pierda la vida de la gracia sanctifying in a convivencia "more uxorio".[209] So the emphasis in Amoris Laetitia is rather on the question of the possible diminution of responsibility and guilt, some conditioning can mitigate or cancel responsibility and guilt against any norm, even against negative precepts and absolute norms. This means that the life of sanctifying grace is not always lost in a “more uxorio” coexistence.

And Amoris Laetitia echoes him: “The Church has a solid reflection on conditioning and mitigating circumstances. For this reason it is no longer possible to say that all those who find themselves in some so-called "irregular" situation live in a state of mortal sin, deprived of sanctifying grace. … A subject, while knowing the norm well, may have great difficulty in understanding "values ​​inherent in the moral norm" […] or he may find himself in concrete conditions that do not allow him to act differently and to take other decisions without a new fault. As the Synod Fathers put it well, "there may be factors that limit the ability to make decisions". [...] "(Amoris Laetitia n. 301)

The extenuating circumstances mentioned by the Pope, as we will see well in the next volume, can be invoked to escape the commandments and receive the Sacraments and appear extensible to many cases so that many people commit serious sins, feel practically justified in carrying them out and moreover receive the Sacraments.

The extenuating circumstances mentioned by the Pope in Amoris Laetitia 301 are those for which it is enough to have great difficulty in understanding "values ​​inherent in the moral norm" to be considered practically incapable of living this norm and therefore to be able to receive sacramental absolution without proposing not to sin more; In fact, Pope Francis writes: "A subject, even though he knows the norm well, can have great difficulty in understanding" values ​​inherent in the moral norm "”. (Amoris Laetitia n.301) This extenuating circumstance as presented can concern all types of sinners (homicides, pedophiles, adulterers, etc.). commit acts of murder or pedophilia but who, despite knowing the divine norms, have great difficulty in understanding the values ​​inherent in the norms that prohibit such sins, would be considered practically incapable of living away from pedophilia and murder, so they could be acquitted in Confession and they could receive the Eucharist without proposing to no longer commit acts of murder or pedophilia. Similarly an adulterer or one who practices homosexuality but who, despite knowing the divine norms, has great difficulty in understanding the values ​​inherent in the norms that prohibit such sins, would be considered practically incapable of living away from such sins and therefore could be absolved in Confession and could receive the Eucharist without proposing to no longer commit adultery, it would be enough, in this line, that he affirms that he has such difficulty for such a person to be sacramentally acquitted and to receive the Eucharist without proposing not to sin anymore and therefore continuing to perform objectively serious acts!

In the Amoris laetitia, moreover, in n. 301 we read: "A subject ... can find himself in concrete conditions that do not allow him to act differently and to make other decisions without a new fault."

This extenuating circumstance as presented can concern all types of sinners (homicides, pedophiles, adulterers, etc.)

More generally, for this extenuating circumstance, anyone who sins seriously (murderer, pedophile, adultery, sodomite, etc. etc.) and is in "concrete conditions that do not allow him to act differently and to take other decisions without new guilt" can be acquitted. sacramentally and to receive the Eucharist without proposing to live according to the divine law and therefore continuing to sin. In this line, a pedophile who finds himself in "concrete conditions that do not allow him to act differently and to take other decisions without a new guilt" might not propose to convert, continue to rape children and even receive the Sacraments! A murderer, in a similar way, who finds himself in "concrete conditions that do not allow him to act differently and to take other decisions without a new guilt" might not propose to convert, continue to perform and also receive the Sacraments! An adulterer who finds himself in "concrete conditions that do not allow him to act differently and to take other decisions without a new guilt" could not propose to convert, continue to carry out acts of adultery and also receive the Sacraments! What establishes that the subject is in such conditions is, in particular, the subject himself to whose conscience the discernment is entrusted in a particular way, as we have seen.

As we noted above, the ATTENUANT ​​IS VERY WIDE EXTENSION ... BUT From what appears in the letter from the Argentine Bishops praised by the Pope, the "concrete conditions that do not allow him to act differently" would be implemented, in particular, in the event that a divorced person remarried, does not want to free herself from a situation of objectively grave sin believing that she would fall into further shortcomings damaging the children of the new union, this mitigating circumstance would make it possible for such a person to receive the Sacraments without having to propose not to sin anymore and therefore continuing adulterous acts in the situation divorced and remarried.

This extenuating circumstance, for which anyone who does not want to get out of the situation of sin in order not to fall into further shortcomings by damaging their children would be exempted from proposing to live according to the Law of God, can obviously be extended to other objectively serious acts (murder, pedophilia, adultery, impure acts against nature etc.) and makes it possible to receive the Sacraments without having to propose not to sin anymore and therefore continuing to carry out objectively serious acts. The pedophile, the murderer, etc., in this line, in order not to fall into further shortcomings by damaging the children, could continue in the sin of pedophilia and in that of murder and should not propose not to sin anymore and could receive the Sacraments precisely without having to propose not to sin anymore ... But more generally it should be emphasized that for this extenuating circumstance it would become practically legitimate to do a serious objective evil to obtain a good ... In this line practically everything could become lawful (murder, theft, blasphemy, rape etc.) to obtain a well ... and you could also receive the Sacraments ...

I repeat: the extenuating circumstances mentioned by the Pope in n. 301, as we will see well in the next volume, can be invoked to escape the commandments and receive the Sacraments and appear extensible to many cases so that many people commit serious sins, feel practically justified in carrying them out and moreover receive the Sacraments ... this is obviously contrary to the sound doctrine and teaching of St. Thomas… God intervene and free us from these colossal errors and these scandals.

I conclude by noting that the German Bishops in their document evidently contrary to sound doctrine, as we have seen above, quote n. 301 of Amoris laetitia saying that it is clear what the Pope means when he states in Amoris laetitia that the Church has a solid body of reflection on mitigating circumstances, so it can no longer be said simply that all those who find themselves in any "irregular" situation live in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace. (AL no. 301). Amoris laetitia, the Bishops specify, does not offer a general rule on this matter, and does not provide an automatic mechanism for admitting all those who are divorced and civilly remarried to the sacraments. Amoris laetitia, in particular, does not stop at the irreversible exclusion of these from the sacraments but opens the doors ... it opens them to the point of accepting even the errors contained in the document of the German Bishops and therefore practically annihilating the need for the resolution not to sin. in order to a valid confession ... he opens them so that many people commit serious sins, they feel practically justified in carrying them out and in addition they receive the Sacraments ... with evident colossal scandal of the faithful!

God intervene.

f) When is charity lost? St. explains it to us. Thomas.

It seems interesting to me at this point in the book to examine here an article from the Sum Theological in which s. Thomas pauses in a particular way to examine the case of the loss of charity (II-IIae q. 24 a. 11) St. Thomas asks himself first of all whether whoever has received charity can lose it.

The answer that the s. Doctor gives to the initial question is that charity is lost because the subject withdraws from the Holy Spirit and from charity itself. The Holy Spirit, specifies the s. Doctor, moves the soul to love God and not to sin, the Paraclete with the influence of him preserves those whom he moves as he wills immune from sin. Charity can do nothing other than what belongs to its essence therefore it cannot sin in any way, charity which in its very nature of charity could be lacking, would not be true charity, yes. Gregory said in this regard that "God's love, if it exists, does great things: if it ceases to do them, there is no charity" ("Quadraginta Hom. In Evangel.", L. II, h . XXX, PL. 76, 1221). Charity has an intrinsic purpose to accomplish great things. Charity, according to the nature of its act, excludes all motives for sin.

The subject, on the other hand, in this world, is changeable due to the freedom of his free will and can sin and lose charity, precisely by withdrawing from it and from the Holy Spirit. It happens that charity often does not act at present and then a motive can intervene that pushes to sin, allowing the charity to be lost. The charity of the blessed cannot be lost, the charity of the travelers does not always currently lead to God and precisely when it does not currently tend towards God, an act can occur that causes the loss of charity.
It belongs to a suit, says s. Thomas, push the power to act, as the habit makes what suits it look good, and bad as far as it is opposed therefore charity cannot be lost where the object that suits it can only appear good that is, in the homeland, where the essence of God is seen, which is the very essence of goodness. Instead the charity of the travelers, who do not see the essence of God, the very essence of goodness, can be lost. [210]

In II-II, q. 24 a. 11 s. Thomas offers us a clarification regarding the affirmation according to which: "..." the love of God, if there is, does great things: if it ceases to do them, there is no charity ".[211]

Here s. Thomas specifies that this statement by St. Gregory does not mean that charity cannot be lost and it does not mean that if a person does not work these great things he has never had charity but he means that as long as the soul has charity, it makes the person do great things, on the other hand, when the soul loses charity, it no longer accomplishes great things. The teaching of St. Thomas is therefore that if there is charity and the Holy Spirit with it, this presence is manifested; when there is no longer such a presence, it cannot manifest itself. As we will see better below: God removed from the soul for mortal sin, the darkness of sin takes over the divine Light and the Light can no longer manifest itself until after the person regains charity.

In the following article (II-IIae q. 24 a. 12) to what we have just seen s. Thomas wonders if a single mortal sin leads to the loss of charity.

Charity, says St. Thomas leads us to submit to the Law of God and to observe it in fact is essential to the charity of loving God above all, so much so that we want to submit to him entirely, and to follow the norm of his precepts in everything. Anything that conflicts with the commands of the Law of God is manifestly contrary to charity and is incompatible with charity, that is, a single serious deviation from the divine Law with grave sin involves the loss of charity:

Says s. Thomas more precisely: "Manifestum est autem quod per quodlibet mortale peccatum, quod divinis praeceptis contrariatur, ponitur praedictae infusioni obstaculum, quia ex hoc ipso quod homo eligendo praefert peccatum divinae amicitiae, quae requirit ut Dei voluntatem statum sins mortalis habitus caritatis perdatur. " (II-IIae q. 24 a. 12) With any mortal sin, contrary to the precepts of God, there is an obstacle to the infusion of charity: because from the fact that a man in his choice prefers sin to friendship with God, which requires that we follow the divine will, it follows that we immediately lose the habit of charity, with a single act of mortal sin. Therefore St. Augustine teaches, that “Thus man is enlightened by God if God is present to him but, if God is absent, he immediately falls into darkness. However, we distance ourselves from God not because of spatial distances between us and him, but because of the aversion of the human will that turns away from him. "[212]

More precisely, s. Thomas explains that charity can be lost in two ways. In a way, directly, voluntarily despising it. In another way, indirectly: when an act contrary to charity is committed, out of a passion of lust or fear. The man who is in the state of perfection does not proceed immediately to the act of mortal sin, but prepares himself for it with some previous negligence, in fact it is said that venial sins predispose to mortal. [213]

As you can see, charity is lost with a single grave sin ... and adultery (such as murder, homosexual practice, etc.) is a grave sin, as we know well and as well as s. Thomas!

Therefore every act of adultery, as a grave sin, deprives the soul of charity and grace and makes every saint forfeit his holiness.

As I said earlier: the extenuating circumstances mentioned by the Pope in n. 301, as we will see better in the next volume, can be invoked to escape the commandments and receive the Sacraments and appear extensible to many cases so that many people commit serious sins, feel practically justified in performing them and moreover receive the Sacraments ... and when I speak of serious sins I mean sins that are such for sound doctrine and therefore having grave matter, full warning and deliberate consent ... Through Amoris Laetitia and more widely through the "paradigm shift", as we are seeing and we will see better and better, true serious sins are legitimized and those who perform them and do not propose to stop are allowed to receive the Sacraments ... the words of card. Kasper, by Msgr. Elbs, the German Bishops etc. they are extremely indicative of this ... and all this obviously goes against charity and against the Thomist doctrine ...

Obviously, Msgr. Fernandez and Amoris Laetitia verbally oppose the possibility that serious sins are legitimate but we must always remember that the doctrine of Msgr. Fernandez and of Amoris Laetitia is not sound doctrine ... therefore what for sound doctrine is a grave sin, for them it is not ... and what they condemn in general is not necessarily condemned by them in particular because precisely according to Amoris Laetitia the more one goes into the particular, the more there is uncertainty (Amoris Laetitia n. 304).

In conclusion, I remember that serious sins cause one to lose charity and open the doors that lead to hell.

Christ intervene, reaffirm the doctrine of salvation and condemn the errors that the current Pope and some of his collaborators spread.

7) Fraternal charity in sound doctrine and in Amoris Laetitia.

 

 

a) Fundamental indications regarding fraternal charity in the Bible and in the Fathers of the Church.

 

 

a, 1) Fraternal charity in the Bible.

 

 

We saw above that on the lips of Jesus love of neighbor has become something new. Jesus clearly states: “You have heard that it was said: You will love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I tell you: love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father who is in heaven; he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and makes it rain on the just and the unjust. In fact, if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brothers only, what extraordinary things do you do? Do not even the pagans do the same? Therefore, be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect. " (Mt 5, 43-48). Under the guidance of the Spirit that Christ gives us, it becomes possible for us to love our neighbor in a supernatural way, to love him as Christ loves him, to love him divinely and holily, to love him with divine charity and wisdom.

According to Spadafora the statement of Jesus, “you will hate your enemy” is not exactly biblical but it effectively renders the message of many pages of the OT, where we find expressions of revenge against the pagans and against the wicked Israelites. We are faced with an attitude of hatred towards enemies that the scribes drew from the prescriptions set for Israel, in Deuteronomy, in particular, regarding the Gentiles (cf. Deut. 20, 13-17; 23, 4-7; 25, 17-19).

This attitude was reinforced by post-biblical Jewish literature.[214]

For the VT, love for one's neighbor is love for the compatriot, a man of the same family or tribe, for people of the same race, or in any case those who, and exclusively they, entered with circumcision or equivalent rite to be part of the community, according to the principle of solidarity, then in force; but all the others are excluded. (cfr. F. Spadafora “Charity” in “Biblical Dictionary” ed. Studium 1963) In this sense, rabbinic literature comments in agreement on the laws regarding the neighbor; always specifying that it is only the Israelite and "not the Samaritan, the foreigner or the proselyte" (Mekiltà, Ex. 21, 14.35, quoted in F. Spadafora "Charity" in "Biblical Dictionary" ed. Studium 1963).

By neighbor, explains A. Penna, in the VT we do not mean every man, rather we mean the member of the people of God, fellow countryman and co-religionist, and the foreigner domiciled among the chosen people (gher) and the multiple expression of command is left to the responsibility and the sensitivity of the individual. (see A. Penna "Love in the Bible." ed. Paideia Brescia 1972 p. 133)

Penna states about love of neighbor in the OT: “In any case, this concept certainly does not include one's enemy (Altra documentation in Nissen, Gott und der Nächste im antiken Judentum, 285-308). Indeed, commenting Ex 21,35:XNUMX, where the case is made of the ox of a man who collides and kills "the ox of his neighbor", the midrash Mekilta explains verbatim: "This excludes the ox of a subordinate, the ox of a Samaritan , the ox of a foreigner, and the ox of a foreign resident ». For his part, Moses Maimonides will only mean "the co-religionist" .... "[215]

The charity to which Christ calls his disciples is a supreme participation in the love with which God loves men, it is a supernatural virtue that prolongs the charity with which Christ loved every man ... therefore it is clearly superior to that which until then was taught on the basis of the AT; it includes in God, in a certain way, in Christ and in us as we will see, even holy hatred, that is the radical opposition to sin but this holy hatred, as we will see, must be understood in a new light, precisely in the fullness of the divine Light that Jesus led.

In the Gospel of Mark we read: "Then one of the scribes who had heard them discussing came up to him and, seeing how he had answered them well, asked him:" Which is the first of all the commandments? ". Jesus replied: “The first is: Listen, Israel! The Lord our God is the only Lord; 30 you will love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, with all your mind and with all your strength. The second is this: You will love your neighbor as yourself. There is no other commandment greater than these ”. The scribe said to him: “You have said well, Master, and according to truth, that He is unique and there is no one but him; to love him with all your heart, with all your intelligence and with all your strength and to love your neighbor as yourself is worth more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices ”. (Mk 12, 28ss; cf. Mt 22, 34-40).

Jesus gave the term "neighbor" its true meaning; for Christ the neighbor is every man, all men. Our charity must be similar to the Father's mercy, it must be universal: “… be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect”. Christ brings humanity back to the original perfection of charity, in sanctifying grace, in the fullest participation in the divine Trinitarian life, therefore Christ invites us to a love of neighbor which is a participation in the Father's love, a universal love. (see F. Spadafora "Charity" in "Biblical Dictionary" ed. Studium 1963)

We will be judged by God on real charity, implemented or neglected, and Jesus underlines precisely in this judgment fraternal charity (cf. Mt 25, 31-46); true charity is necessarily also charity towards one's neighbor.

In this light we must also read the affirmations of s. Paul: “Do not owe anything to anyone except mutual love; because whoever loves the other has fulfilled the Law. In fact: You will not commit adultery, you will not kill, you will not steal, you will not desire, and any other commandment, is summed up in this word: You will love your neighbor as yourself. Charity does no harm to one's neighbor: in fact, the fullness of the Law is charity. " (Rom. 13, 8 sqq.)

True charity is necessarily also charity towards one's neighbor.

Whoever truly loves God also loves his neighbor and procures true good for his neighbor; in charity towards neighbor all the other commandments that regulate our relationship with our neighbor are contained.

The whole Law is enclosed in charity which is precisely the fullness of the Law, as St. Paul.

Obviously the charity we are talking about is a supernatural love which in its realization also with regard to the neighbor fulfills the divine law, perfected in Jesus (Mt 5, 17) Savior of all.

St. John the apostle who bent down on Christ's breast at the Last Supper and who made charity his particular distinctive feature, specifies regarding fraternal charity "Dear friends, let us love one another, because love is from God : whoever loves was generated by God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. In this the love of God was manifested in us: God sent his only-begotten Son into the world, so that we might have life through him. In this lies love: it was not we who loved God, but it was he who loved us and sent his Son as a victim of atonement for our sins. Beloved, if God loved us like this, we too must love one another. No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God remains in us and his love is perfect in us. … And we have known and believed the love that God has in us. God is love; whoever remains in love remains in God and God remains in him. … We love because he first loved us. If someone says: "I love God" and hates him brother to him, he is a liar. Indeed, whoever does not love his brother whom he sees cannot love God whom he does not see. And this is the commandment we have from him: whoever loves God must also love his brother. " (1 Jn 4, 7-21)

We see clearly in this text the intimate connection that binds the love of God and that of neighbor: God first loved us and sent his Son as a victim of expiation for our sins; if God loved us like this, we too must love one another. Fraternal charity is participation in divine charity and "prolongs" it in a certain way.

Jesus calls his disciples to love one another as he loved them “I give you a new commandment: love one another. As I have loved you, so you also love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples: if you have love for one another. " (Jn 13:34)… “This is my commandment: love one another as I have loved you. No one has a greater love than this: to lay down their life for their friends. ... This I command you: that you love one another. (Jn 15, 12s.17) Christ God man loved us with a divine charity and a human charity that participates in the divine, we must love each other with such charity sharing in the divine . God himself is charity (cf. I Io. 4, 8) his charity towards men and towards creation is the supreme model for ours and is a reality in which we participate in Christ and which must manifest itself in our life, especially in the relationship with our brothers and sisters. of faith (see F. Spadafora "Charity" in "Biblical Dictionary" ed. Studium 1963)

According to Christ, charity must also reach enemies!

Jesus is very clear: “But I tell you: love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father who is in heaven; he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and makes it rain on the just and the unjust. In fact, if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brothers only, what extraordinary things do you do? Do not even the pagans do the same? Therefore, be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect. " (Mt 5, 43-48)

Christ gave his life for everyone even for his enemies ... and this obviously clearly surpasses any previous teaching from the Bible ... "God demonstrates his love for us, because, while we were still sinners, Christ died for us" ( Rm 5,8). Christ gave his life in love for his enemies and calls us to follow and imitate him in love by taking up the cross (Lk. 9). He suffered for us for us, leaving us an example, so that we imitate him; the letter of s. Pietro is very clear about it:

"Christ also suffered for you,

leaving you an example,

to follow in his footsteps:

he committed no sin

and no deception was found in his mouth;

insulted, did not respond with insults,

mistreated, did not threaten revenge,

but he trusted in him

who judges with justice.

He carried our sins into his body

on the wood of the cross,

because, no longer living for sin,

we lived for justice;

by his wounds you have been healed. " (1 Pet.2,21ff.)

We read above: “In this is love: it was not we who loved God, but he who loved us and sent his Son as a victim of atonement for our sins. Beloved, if God loved us like this, we too must love one another. "(1 Jn. 4, 7)

Christ, as a victim of atonement, made amends for our sins and loved us in this way, we must follow him in this way of charity towards others, towards our brothers and towards all sinful men, even towards our enemies ...

Fraternal charity in this line is manifested in its crude and glorious atoning reality ... an atoning reality that is lived under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, in sanctifying grace, in faith and in all the virtues.

a, 2) Fraternal charity in the teachings of the Fathers of the Church, of the Doctors and of the Magisterium.

For the Fathers it is evident that there is only one charity, which comes from God and leads to love of God and neighbor; as s. Augustine: there is only one charity with two commandments, the charity with which we love our neighbor is no different from that with which we love God[216]

One cannot love God without loving one's neighbor nor is it possible to love one's neighbor without loving God (cf. St. Maximus the Confessor, “De caritate”, I, 13, 23, PG., 90, 964-965). The love of God is the origin and source of love of neighbor[217]. [218]

“We must not let contemplation of God prevent us from loving our neighbor. Love of neighbor, however, must not make us abandon the contemplation of God "(St. Gregory the Great," Hom. 38 in Evang. ", N ° 10, PL., 76, 1288). [219]

Our charity for our neighbor shows whether true charity for God is in us (St. Isidore, “Differentiarum liber”., Lib. 2, n. 143, PL., 83, 92D). True charity towards one's neighbor is found only in Christ's disciples (cf. St. Maximus the Confessor, "De caritate", IV, 100, PG., 90, 1073 A)[220]

Charity leads us to love our enemies, but what does this really mean? How should we love sinners, God's enemies and offenders?

We must love them as God's creatures, not as sinners, God does not ask us to love evil. [221].

St. Leo asks us to love them as God loves them who pours out his blessings on everyone, good and bad (St. Leo the Great, “Sermo XXI”, PL., 54, 190); specifies the s. Doctor that we must not love vices but men, love them because they have our nature and can one day become children of God (St. Leo the Great, "Sermo XLVIII", PL., 54, 299; cfr. "Sermo XII", PL., 54, 169).

St. Augustine taught this same doctrine by specifying that the doctrine of Christ also provides for punishments that are given in some cases to sinners without evil hatred. [222].

Christ came for sinners, to redeem them he suffered and died on the cross[223] [224] … And as he himself says, we must prolong the work of Christ guided by his Spirit in history, we must imitate him in his charity also with regard to sinners, enemies.

The superiority of the Gospel over the law is manifested with regard to love of neighbor and in particular with regard to the love of enemies. The Gospel goes further in the context of the precept of love of neighbor, especially as regards the love of enemies. The Gospel teaches the supernatural life, the divine life and therefore goes beyond philosophy and natural law [225] [226]

The precept of the love of enemies is a demanding, burdensome, burdensome precept[227], it is a very difficult precept (cf. "Sermo 15", n ° 8, PL., 38, 120), it is an impossible precept for us to carry out without God's help, but God helps us ... and it is an essential precept to live.

The friendship of God, the adoptive sonship of God are paid with this this price of love for the enemies: God loved us when we were enemies ... and we must do the same towards our enemies ... (cfr. St. Maximus of Turin , "Hom. 64" to S. Steph., PL., 57, 382).

St. Augustine affirms that: perfect charity consists in loving your enemies in order to convert them and make them your brothers in Christ[228].

Says s. Maximus the Confessor that whoever possesses charity does not tire in following Christ but bears with a strong heart every travail, contempt and insult with a strong soul without thinking of evil. (S. Massimo, "De caritate", I, 29-30, PG., 90, 966)

St. Maximus the Confessor also affirmed that whoever does not imitate him in three things does not love Christ: 1 ° to deserve benefits for men; 2 ° support the ungrateful and detractors; 3 ° forgive those who have hurt us (cf. St. Maximus, “De caritate”, IV, 55, PG., 90, col. 1059).

Here we are obviously at very high levels of perfection, unthinkable before the coming of Christ.

This charity towards enemies is a duty for all but few, great, truly spiritual men, live it: "Et ego schia, pauci illud faciunt, magni sunt qui faciunt, spirituales faciunt" (St. Augustine, "Sermo 56", cp . 11, no. 15, PL., 38, 384).

It is sufficient, according to Origen, to fulfill the precept not to return evil to the evil that is done to us, for injustice let us commit ourselves to offer a benefit[229].

St. Gregory of Nissa states in particular: "The enemy must be loved in not repaying evil with evil, but returning injustice with benefit." (S. Gregorio di Nissa "Homilies on the Song of Songs" Ed. Città Nuova Rome 1996, p. 115s)

Even with regard to enemies there is an order in charity because he is only our enemy than he who is our enemy and God's enemy (cf. Origen, "In Canticum Canticorum", lib. 3, PG., 13, deserves greater respect. 157 BC).

One of the models of charity towards enemies is Saint Stephen who prays for his executioners; many teachings of the Fathers have developed as a commentary on the biblical passages dealing with the death of this famous deacon [230]

Those who want to discover examples of fraternal charity of the first generations of monks will find many of them both in the "Apoftegmi", and in the "Lives of the Fathers", and in the "Lausiaca history"[231].

In the line of the Fathers s. Thomas affirms that loving our neighbor as ourselves means that we must love our neighbor in an orderly way: "debemus diligere ordinate ..." ("Collationes in decem praeceptis" a. 2) The neighbor is to be loved in an orderly way, that is, no more than what one must love God or as much as we must love God but must be loved, according to the biblical words, as ourselves, that is, we must love our neighbor in a way analogous to the way in which we love ourselves, as the same St. Thomas.

The Angelic Doctor explains that the precept of fraternal love is formulated in a perfect way and must be understood not in the sense that one must love one's neighbor as much as he loves himself, that is, to the extent that he loves himself, but it must be understood in the sense that everyone he must love his neighbor in a way similar to how he loves himself: everyone must love his neighbor for God, as he must love himself for God, that is, with a holy love; each one must love his neighbor so as not to condescend his neighbor in evil, in sin, but only in good, love of neighbor must, in fact, be just; each one must love his neighbor not for his own advantage, but wanting the good of his neighbor as everyone wants the good of himself, love of neighbor, in fact, must be true (cf. II-II, q. 44 a. 7 co.) As the love of God commits us to the sanctification and salvation of our souls, so this same love commits us to the sanctification and salvation of our neighbors, our brothers in Christ, and this salvation and sanctification takes place through the observance of the Law of God. As we must commit ourselves to implement and live the commandments we must help others to implement and live them.

St. Alphonsus affirms that: “Then we must love our neighbor as ourselves, sicut te ipsum; like ourselves, but no more than ourselves; hence we are not obliged to prefer the good of our neighbor to our good, except when the good of our neighbor is of a greater order than our good, and when our neighbor is in extreme necessity. The order of goods is this: first it is the spiritual life of the soul, then the temporal life of the body, then the fame, and then the stuff.

... by the precept of charity we must love all the next dead in God's grace, since we cannot love the damned, indeed we are obliged to hate them as eternal enemies of our God. And we must love all the next living, even if sinners, and although our enemies. I say, even if they are sinners, because although they are currently in God's disgrace, they can nevertheless be reconciled with God, and be saved ... Among the obligations therefore of the precept of charity this is the first, to love all our neighbors with love, not only internal, but still external; hence we are bound to use with our neighbor, even though our enemy, all the common signs of benevolence, which we use with our other friends. … The second obligation with one's neighbor is to give him alms when he is poor, especially if he is shameful, and we can give it to him. ... The third obligation is the fraternal correction that we must make to our neighbor when he is in mortal sin, or is about to fall into it, and there is hope that the correction will bear fruit ... The fourth obligation of charity is to console the afflicted, and especially the afflicted. infirm, when we can. … The fifth obligation of charity is to give a good example, and not to give scandal to others. ... " [232]

St. Alphonsus within love of neighbor includes the discussion of cooperation in evil, the Holy Doctor specifies that formal cooperation in evil is illicit while material cooperation is licit: "Now these material cooperations can be licit when there are three conditions: 1. that the act of your cooperation (as already said) is in itself indifferent. 2. That you are not bound by office to prevent another's sin. 3. That you have just and proportionate cause to be able to cooperate in this way; since then the sin of the neighbor does not come from your cooperation, but from the malice of him who uses your action to sin. "[233]

In the "Vademecum for confessors on some moral issues relating to married life." we read that material cooperation in evil is lawful: "... when these three conditions are given jointly:

the action of the cooperating spouse is not in itself illegal; (Denzinger-Schönmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum, 2795, 3634)

there are proportionately serious reasons for cooperating in the spouse's sin;

try to help the spouse (patiently, with prayer, with charity, with dialogue: not necessarily at that moment, nor on every occasion) to desist from such conduct. "[234]

Jesus has given us an excellent example of charity for our neighbors: "By loving one another, the disciples imitate the love of Jesus, which they in turn receive." (Catechism of the Catholic Church no.1823)

The Catechism of the Catholic Church still affirms in n. 1878: "Love of neighbor is inseparable from love for God."

The Catechism itself develops a broad treatment of love of neighbor by treating the commandments ranging from the fourth to the tenth of the Decalogue, these commandments, in particular, specify the commandment, more generic, for which we must love our neighbor as ourselves. In Gaudium et spes we read: “God, who has fatherly care for all, willed that all men form one family and treat each other as brothers. All, in fact, created in the image of God "who from one man produced the whole human race to populate the whole earth" (Acts 17,26:17,21), are called to the same end, which is God himself. Therefore love of God and neighbor is the first and greatest commandment. Sacred Scripture, for its part, teaches that the love of God cannot be separated from the love of neighbor ... Indeed, the Lord Jesus, when he prays to the Father that "they may all be one, as you and I are one alone "(Jn 2,15:16), opening to us perspectives inaccessible to human reason, has suggested to us a certain similarity between the union of the divine Persons and the union of the children of God in truth and love. ... Going down to practical consequences of greater urgency, the Council inculcates respect for man: each one considers his neighbor, no one excepted, as another "himself", taking into account his existence and the means necessary to live it worthily (Cf. Jas 16,19: 31-XNUMX.), So as not to imitate that rich man who took no care of poor Lazarus (cf. Lk XNUMX: XNUMX-XNUMX). " [235]

Paul VI wrote: «Not diminishing in anything the salutary doctrine of Christ is an eminent form of charity towards souls. But this must always be accompanied by the patience and goodness of which the Lord himself set the example in dealing with men. Having come not to judge but to save (cf. Jn 3,17:XNUMX), He was certainly intransigent with evil, but merciful towards people ". [236]

Not diminishing in anything the salutary doctrine of Christ is also an eminent form of fraternal charity because the true good of our brothers is in the Truth and therefore in the true and salutary doctrine of Christ.

Charity and therefore God leads the Church to live according to the sound doctrine in the divine commandments and to spread this sound doctrine for the salvation of men; charity leads the Church to walk on the way of the Cross with the wisdom of the Cross and to help souls to walk on the same way and in the same way, in holiness. Precisely as a charitable Mother, the Church is firm in defending the universal and permanent validity of the precepts that prohibit intrinsically evil acts.

Says s. John Paul II: “95. … The motherhood of the Church can never be separated from her teaching mission, which she must always fulfill as the faithful Spouse of Christ, the Truth in person "(VS n. 95-96)

Precisely as the Bride of Christ the Truth, the Church must always proclaim and bear witness to the: "... principle of truth and consistency, so it does not accept to call evil good and good evil", [237]

As a charitable teacher, the Church must not tire of proclaiming the truth in the moral field: “As a teacher, she never tires of proclaiming the moral norm… The Church is by no means the author or the arbitrator of this norm. In obedience to the truth, which is Christ, whose image is reflected in the nature and dignity of the human person, the Church interprets the moral norm and proposes it to all men of good will, without hiding the demands of radicalism and perfection " .[238]

The Church, for the charity that is radically in her, the Spouse of Christ Truth, must always proclaim the moral norm, of which she is neither the author nor the arbiter! Not even the Pope is the author or arbiter of the moral norm! In obedience to the Truth, which is Christ, immersed in his Light and in his Charity, the Church must interpret the moral norm and propose it to all men of good will, without hiding the demands of radicality and perfection. True charity does not hide from the neighbor the demands of radicality and perfection of the moral norm.

Therefore the Church in teaching the moral norm with precision is not uncompromising or lacking in mercy, it is instead truly charitable and truly merciful ... because true charity and true mercy, true understanding and genuine compassion, are only in the Truth ...

True comprehensive and compassionate charity is not brought about by putting aside or weakening the truth about morality, but by clearly proposing it in its intimate meaning of irradiation and participation of the eternal Wisdom of the Trinity, which has come to us in Christ, and in its intimate meaning of gift. and service for man, for the growth of his freedom and for the pursuit of his happiness in God.[239]

The Church, guided by charity, defends universal and immutable moral norms and with this she defends human freedom because there is no freedom apart from truth (cf. VS n. 95-96)

Obviously the Church in her work of spreading the Truth in charity must be truly wise to help all souls, even the weakest, to save themselves; but everything must be done in the "splendor of Truth"

b) Clarifications regarding fraternal charity with particular reference to what Amoris Laetitia affirms.

God enlighten us more and more.

The text of Amoris Laetitia speaks of fraternal charity in various passages (n. 86, 118, 129) and affirms, in particular, in n. 306: “In any circumstance, before those who find it difficult to fully live the divine law, the invitation to walk the via caritatis must resound. Fraternal charity is the first law of Christians (cf. Jn 15,12:5,14; Gal 1:4,8). Let us not forget the promise of the Scriptures: "Above all, keep fervent charity among yourselves, for charity covers a multitude of sins" (4,24 Pt 3,30); "Atone for your sins with alms and your iniquities with acts of mercy towards the afflicted" (Dn XNUMX); "Water extinguishes the fire that rages, alms atone for sins" (Sir XNUMX:XNUMX). "

In the next paragraphs I will carry out an in-depth analysis on some aspects of Catholic doctrine regarding fraternal charity and on the other hand I will make some clarifications on the affirmations of Amoris Laetitia in this regard.

b, 1) Christ, the supreme model of fraternal charity, taught us not to give in to sin and to walk the way of the Cross and martyrdom.

Obviously, true fraternal charity has its model and its culmination in Christ who, as we have seen, had supreme charity being God-Man, Head of the Church, understanding and traveler, the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in n. 478: "Jesus knew and loved us, each and every one, during his life, his agony and his passion, and for each of us he offered himself" and adds that the Sacred Heart of Jesus: "... is considered the main sign and symbol […] of that infinite love, with which the divine Redeemer incessantly loves the eternal Father and all men ”. "

Christ loved us supremely, He lived supremely in charity, as seen, and therefore in fraternal charity, He lived in the most perfect way the commandment of fraternal charity and worked above all for our eternal salvation, for our sanctification; Through the Church, he taught us to live in the perfection of charity, on the path of the commandments, he taught us to consider adultery a very serious sin, he taught us to consider homosexual acts as very serious sins, he taught us to consider other acts as objectively serious. Helping people to live outside the commandments, presenting sound doctrine in a partial and deviant way is not according to the teaching of Christ, it is not true fraternal charity taught to us by Christ! The Church is called not to deceive souls and to make them walk in less "narrow" ways than the road established by Christ, but is called to form souls in the narrow way, in the way of the Cross, in the way of Christ….

St. John Paul II in Veritatis Splendor affirms “The Church looks at Christ every day with untiring love, fully aware that only in him lies the true and definitive answer to the moral problem…. Crucified Christ reveals the authentic sense of freedom, lives it fully in the total gift of himself and calls the disciples to take part in the very freedom of him. " (VS no. 85)

The charity of Christ, also fraternal charity, shines in him crucified, it is a charity that helps people to walk on the way of the Cross and not outside it. The charity of Christ as man made him love God above his life and the life of others and made him ready for martyrdom and for the more naked and painful Cross. St. Ignatius of Antioch wrote: “Non-believers have the imprint of this world, but the faithful who are in charity carry the image of God the Father imprinted through Jesus Christ. If we, with his grace, are not ready to die to participate in his Passion, his life is not in us. "[240] …. this is the charity that was supremely in Christ and this is the charity that Christ wants to be born in us. It is useless to delude oneself, the Gospel is the way of the Cross! The task of Christ is not to remove the Cross from the shoulders of the people but to help people carry this cross .. St. Paul says "all those who want to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted." (2Tim. 3, 12). living in Christ, in charity, finds the Cross but also the strength to face the Cross and live in true freedom.

St. John Paul II states in this line: “It is the truth that frees us in the face of power and gives the strength of martyrdom. ... Communion with the crucified and risen Lord is the inexhaustible source from which the Church draws relentlessly in order to live in freedom, give herself and serve ...

Jesus, therefore, is the living and personal synthesis of perfect freedom in total obedience to the will of God. His crucified flesh is the full Revelation of the indissoluble bond between freedom and truth, just as his resurrection from the dead is the supreme exaltation. of the fruitfulness and saving power of a freedom lived in truth. " (VS no. 86-87)

The Crucifix reveals the indissoluble bond between charity, truth and freedom; truth and freedom are truly lived in Christ, in charity, on the way of divine commandments on the way of the Cross but they lead to the Resurrection, they lead to glory ... there is no other ladder to climb to Heaven than the Cross: this is the ladder that Jesus wants us to ascend, because he truly loves us. To truly love someone means helping him to follow Christ on the path of charity, truth and freedom, that is, on the path of divine commandments, on the path of the Cross that leads to Heaven. It is useless to delude oneself! Jesus gives us this great lesson of true fraternal charity.

We understand well and we will understand even better, in this line, from what we have said and from what we will say that the true via caritatis, the true way of fraternal charity is not the one that emerges through Amoris Laetitia and through the "paradigm shift" that Pope Francis is implementing ...

Given the yielding to immorality that Amoris Laetitia presents, it is obvious that the doctrine contained in this exhortation does not follow the path of fraternal charity of Christ Crucified ...

b, 2)Fraternal charity makes us help our neighbor to walk on the way of the Law of God, that is, on the way of the Cross, and to be ready for martyrdom.

May the sacred cross be our light.

Salvation passes through Christ, through the commandments and then through the Cross…. "If anyone wants to come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross every day and follow me" (Lk 9,23:86). St. John Paul II affirmed: "The witness of Christ is the source, paradigm and resource for the witness of the disciple, called to take the same path: ... Charity, according to the demands of evangelical radicalism, can lead the believer to the supreme witness of martyrdom. Always following the example of Jesus who dies on the cross: "" (VS n. 87-XNUMX)

In fact, Jesus said: "If anyone wants to come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross every day and follow me" (Lk 9,23:5,1) and St. Paul specified, in the light of the Cross of Christ: "Make yourselves therefore imitators of God, as beloved children and walk in charity, in the way that Christ also loved us and gave himself for us, offering himself to God as a sacrifice of sweet smell "(Eph 2: XNUMX-XNUMX).

Charity is brought about by denying ourselves and following Christ on the way of the Cross; this means that it can lead the believer to the supreme witness of martyrdom through participation in the Passion of Christ. If a Christian lives in true charity, he is, in reality, always ready for martyrdom. As we saw above, yes. Ignatius of Antioch stated: “Non-believers have the imprint of this world, but the faithful who are in charity carry the image of God the Father imprinted through Jesus Christ. If we, with his grace, are not ready to die to participate in his Passion, his life is not in us. "[241]

The words of s. Ignatius are truly illuminating: if we, with his grace, are not ready to die to participate in his Passion, his life is not in us.

Fraternal charity leads us to lead our brothers to faith and charity and therefore to the strength that gives them to be able to remain faithful to the divine law even in the midst of the most terrible trials and to the point of martyrdom.

All Holy Scripture is studded with shining examples of the glorious martyrs, such as St. Stefano, like s. James the Apostle “… who died martyrs to confess their faith and their love to the Master and not to deny him. ... "(VS no. 90s)

Charity makes us firm in the Law of God until death and fraternal charity leads us to lead our brothers to faith and charity and therefore to the strength that gives us and them to be able to remain faithful to the divine Law even in the midst of trials. more terrible and to the point of martyrdom.

The history of the Church is rich in extraordinary examples of martyrs (cf. VS n. 91) and on the other hand it is rich in Pastors who have taught with their life and word that: the love of God implies martyrdom as it necessarily implies respect for his commandments, even in the most serious and difficult circumstances, and the absolute refusal to betray them, even with the intention of saving one's own life or the lives of others (cf. VS n. 91). Martyrdom affirms the inviolability of the moral order and the intangibility of man's personal dignity; says s. John Paul II: “92. In martyrdom as an affirmation of the inviolability of the moral order, the sanctity of God's law and at the same time the intangibility of the personal dignity of man, created in the image and likeness of God shine forth: it is a dignity that is never allowed to debase or to counter, albeit with good intentions, whatever the difficulties. Jesus admonishes us with the utmost severity: "What good is it to man to gain the whole world, if he then loses his own soul?" (Mk 8,36). "(VS n. 92)

It is never allowed to debase or oppose the dignity of man, even with good intentions!

Therefore, every human meaning that one claims to attribute to the act in itself morally evil is illusory and false: "Martyrdom disavows as illusory and false every" human meaning "that one claims to attribute, albeit in" exceptional "conditions, to the an act in itself morally bad; even more openly it reveals its true face: that of a violation of man's "humanity", even more in those who perform it than in those who suffer it. (Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, past. Constitution on the Church in the contemporary world Gaudium et spes, 27.) "(VS n. 92)

The act in itself morally evil is a violation of humanity above all of whoever carries it out.

And martyrdom reveals and exalts perfect humanity and the true life of the human person (cf. VS n. 92) ... perfect humanity and true life in Christ ...

"If we, with his grace, are not ready to die to participate in his Passion, his life is not in us."[242]

Martyrs are men who have welcomed the gift of Christ's life! The witness of the martyrs is light for the world; and in this light is manifested the Light which is God, which sustains them in martyrdom. The life of martyrs and saints is a life transfigured by the splendor of moral truth and ultimately by the splendor of divine Light, by the splendor of divine Truth. In the collection of the XIII dom. of the Ordinary Time we read “O God, who made us children of the light with your adopted Spirit, let us not fall back into the darkness of error, but let us always remain luminous in the splendor of truth. For our Lord Jesus Christ ... "St. John Paul II states:" The martyrs, and more widely all the saints in the Church, with the eloquent and fascinating example of a life totally transfigured by the splendor of moral truth, illuminate every age of history awakening the moral sense. "(VS n. 93) Martyrs reawaken the moral sense and therefore illuminate every age, martyrs are a sign of the highest vocation of man, a vocation above all to call good good and evil evil, a vocation to truth, to the Light and to the testimony of the Light.

Jesus said clearly, in this line: "You are the light of the world." (Mt 5) The Christian is called to spread the divine Light and must be ready for martyrdom. All Christians must be ready to give their lives to remain faithful to the holy Law of God, all Christians must be ready to face the heroic commitment involved in the Christian vocation: "... in the face of the many difficulties that even in the most ordinary circumstances fidelity to the moral order can demand, the Christian is called, with the grace of God invoked in prayer, to a sometimes heroic commitment, supported by the virtue of fortitude, through which - as Saint Gregory the Great teaches - he can even "love difficulties of this world in view of the eternal reward ". (Moralia in Job, VII, 21, 24: PL 75, 778.) "(VS n. 93)

All Christians must be ready to give a consistent witness every day even at the cost of suffering and serious sacrifices, this can involve a heroic commitment. Heroism is for all Christians because God gives them grace for such heroism ... we have seen above the intangibility of the personal dignity of man, created in the image and likeness of God, it is a dignity that is never allowed to demean or to oppose ... never! "... God's love necessarily implies respect for his commandments, even in the most serious circumstances, and the refusal to betray them, even with the intention of saving one's life." (VS n. 91) You understand well that charity includes heroism in itself ... and all Christians must be ready for this heroism ...

"If we, with his grace, are not ready to die to participate in his Passion, his life is not in us."[243]

We understand, in this line, also the error of Cardinal Kasper, friend and close collaborator of Pope Francis, when he says: “To live together as brother and sister? Of course I have high respect for those who are doing this. But it's a heroic act, and heroism is not for the average Christian. That could also create new tensions. Adultery is not only wrong sexual behavior. It's to leave a familiaris consortio, a communion, and to establish a new one. But normally it's also the sexual relations in such a communion, so I can't say whether it's ongoing adultery. Therefore I would say, yes, absolution is possible. Mercy means God gives to everybody who converts and repents a new chance. "[244]  My indicative translation: “Living together as a brother and sister? Of course, I have great respect for those who are doing this. But it is a heroic act, and heroism is not for the average Christian. This could also create new tensions. Adultery is not just sexual misconduct. It is leaving a family consortium, a communion and establishing a new one. But normally there are also sexual relationships in such fellowship, so I can't tell if adultery is going on. So I would say, yes, acquittal is possible. Mercy means that God gives all those who convert and repent, a new chance. "

The words of Cardinal Kasper contain various errors, I avoid examining them all; I only point out, here, the grave error contained in the statement that heroism is not for the average Christian; all Christians are called to live the commandments to the point of heroism and martyrdom, God makes us capable of this, as we have seen, with grace!

The Christian vocation is a vocation to deification, and God gives us to live a life deified in Christ and to observe his holy commandments always and everywhere, therefore he gives us never to transgress the negative precepts of the Decalogue. The Christian has from God the strength to face the highest heroism to always obey the divine laws. Charity and therefore sanctifying grace imply this strength capable of overcoming the most terrible trials. Fraternal charity leads us to lead our brothers to faith and charity and therefore to the strength that gives them to be able to remain faithful to the divine law even in the midst of the most terrible trials, up to martyrdom, following Christ on the way of the Cross. On the other hand, the voice of God in man's conscience has always affirmed without ambiguity that there are truths and moral values ​​for which one must also be willing to give one's life therefore history shows that even men who do not belong to the Church of Christ in a visible way they have come to affirm and manifest with their life the absoluteness of the moral good; s. Justin believes that the Stoics are among these men killed for affirming the truth in the moral field. (see VS 94)

The charity that leads us to be willing to give our life for the Law of God and the fraternal charity that leads us to make our neighbor willing to give our life for the Law of God fully implement that reality that all men are called to welcome: true humanity according to God's original plan, that is, humanity in the image and likeness of God, true humanity that shines in Christ, true God and true man.

We understand well and we will understand even better, in this line, from what we have said and from what we will say that the true via caritatis, the true way of fraternal charity is not the one that emerges through Amoris Laetitia and through the "paradigm shift" that Pope Francis is implementing ...

Given the yielding to grave errors in the area of ​​moral theology and therefore to immorality, grave sins and scandals that Amoris Laetitia presents, it is obvious that the doctrine contained in this exhortation does not follow the path of fraternal charity of Christ Crucified and of martyrs ... but rather follow the opposite way, that is, the way of those who crucify Christ with sin and make those who follow him suffer.

In Sacred Scripture we read that our sins offend and mysteriously strike Christ himself (cf. Mt 25,45; Acts 9,4-5.)

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "The Church, in the magisterium of her faith and in the testimony of her saints, has never forgotten that" every single sinner is really the cause and instrument of the [...] sufferings "of the divine Redeemer." (Catechism of the Catholic Church no. 598)

b, 2,1) True fraternal charity makes us help our neighbor to acquire the wisdom and love of the Cross in order to attain celestial beatitude.

Our gaze, however, must not stop at martyrdom, at the Cross but through them must reach the Ultimate End, that is Heaven and God ... and in view of the eternal reward, enlightened by divine wisdom, we can arrive at: "loving the difficulties of this world in view of the eternal reward ". (Moralia in Job, VII, 21, 24: PL 75, 778.) "(VS n. 93)

In the encyclical "Quod Numquam" of Pope Pius IX we read: "" Raise your gaze to the One who preceded you suffering more serious torments: "he went to meet the pain of ignominious death, so that his members would learn to flee from worldly ambitions, not to to fear terror at all, to love adversity in the name of truth, to reject prosperity with fear "[S. Greg. M. Reg. Past. p. I, c. 3] [245]

The Ultimate End of man's way is Heaven, the only way to reach it is the Cross, there are no others (cf. Santa Rosa da Lima: P. Hansen, Vita mirabilis […], (Rome 1664) p. 137; Quoted in Catechism of the Catholic Church no. 618).

Obviously, the way of the Cross is a way that is followed in charity and in the holy Law of God.

God through St. Paul exhorts us to think about the things of Heaven and to seek the things of Heaven (cf. Col. 3)… Thinking about the things of Heaven and looking for the things of Heaven means in particular opening ourselves to divine wisdom so that it is this wisdom that enlightens and guides in the our life, our judgments, our choices and may divine wisdom illuminate the life of our neighbors in a fuller way. Divine wisdom is the wisdom of the Cross which makes us understand the preciousness of the Cross and therefore the preciousness of our participation in the Passion of Christ and therefore leads us to love the Cross in view of the eternal reward. The Cross is a mystery of charity and of perfect implementation of the Law of God for the salvation of the world, one participates in the Cross in charity and in the implementation of the holy Law of God.

St. Louis M. Grignon affirms regarding this wisdom “You can nevertheless, indeed you must ask for the wisdom of the cross: that tasty and experiential science of truth which allows you to see in the light of faith even the most hidden mysteries, such as that of the cross. This wisdom can only be reached through many hardships, profound humiliations and fervent prayers. "[246]

St. Paul of the Cross affirms in the light of this wisdom of the Cross: "

Fortunate is that heart, which is abandoned in the CROSS, in the arms of the BELOVED, burns only with holy LOVE; even more ventured is he who in the naked suffering of him, without a shadow of rejoicing, is transformed into a CROSS.

… Whoever truly loves God desires to suffer and do great things for Him (Lt. 1, 129 - 687). … I rejoice that God discovers his Cross in you: I rejoice that he makes you love it (Lt. 1, 327), thus making deeper roots (Lt. 2, 108). … Whoever knew the great treasure that is in the CROSS, would only want to suffer for Christ! … The servant of God who is not crucified who is he? (Lt. 1, 63). Be happy on the CROSS! (Lt. 1, 147) Enjoy being crucified ... (Lt. 1, 229) (Lt. 1, 555).

… I have never lacked crosses, which I would like to kiss like precious daisies! (Lt. 2, 288). They are the joys of my heart! (Lt. 1, 3). "[247]

In the Office of Readings of the liturgical memorial of St. Rosa of Lima, a text that the saint wrote is proposed to us for meditation; in it, among other affirmations we read: “Let no one err or be deceived; this is the only true stairway to heaven, and outside the cross there is no other way to ascend to heaven. ... From Christ and with words from his own mouth I warn you that grace cannot be received without suffering afflictions. " [248]

In this line we find the wonderful expressions of St. Luigi Grignon de Montfort on love for the Cross: “Take up his cross! ... Put it on your forehead, repeating with Saint Paul:

"As for me, there is no other boast than in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ". … Finally, place it in your heart, with love, to transform it into a bush

burning that burns day and night in the pure love of God, without ever being consumed. "[249]

The French saint himself, after having dealt with the extraordinary preciousness of the Cross, affirms: “When you are told to love the cross, we do not mean to speak of sensitive love. … You can love the cross with another love, which I call rational, due to the fact that it has its seat in the upper part, that is, in reason. "[250] There is also another way of loving the Cross: "It ensures that, even without experiencing a sensible joy or sensing a rational pleasure in the soul, one loves and tastes one's cross with a gaze of pure faith even though often everything is in fighting or alert at the bottom,

who moans, complains, cries and seeks comfort "[251]

Prayer after Communion for the liturgical memorial of St. Paul of the Cross is the following: “May communion in this sacrifice, O Father, give us the wisdom of the cross which illuminated your priest Saint Paul, so that we adhere fully to Christ and collaborate, in the Church, in the redemption of the world. For Christ our Lord. "

Prayer collect for the liturgical memorial of St. John of the Cross is the following: "O God, who led Saint John of the Cross to the holy mountain that is Christ, through the dark night of renunciation and the ardent love of the cross, grant us to follow him as a teacher of spiritual life, to reach the contemplation of your glory. For our Lord ... "

God fill us with the wisdom and love of the Cross.

The Cross is a mystery of charity and of perfect implementation of the Law of God for the salvation of the world, one participates in the Cross in charity and in the implementation of the holy Law of God in the footsteps of Christ who was certainly full of the wisdom and love of the Cross. and that precisely he wants us to participate also in this wisdom and this love.

Let us consider that the more perfect our participation in the Cross and therefore in the charity but also in the sufferings of Christ, the greater will be our participation in his glory and the greater will be the glory that we will give to God; let us also consider that the more perfect the participation of our neighbors in the Cross and in Christ's sufferings, the greater their participation in his glory. Those who truly love themselves and others in charity want to immerse themselves and them in the most perfect way in the Passion of Christ and therefore in the wisdom and love of the Cross. Charity leads us to walk and to make souls walk in the wisdom and love of the Cross, and therefore on the way of the Cross; therefore I underline: whoever really loves himself and others in charity wants to immerse himself and them in the Passion of Christ in the most perfect way and therefore in the wisdom and love of the Cross ... Whoever really loves himself and others in charity does not he wants to dispense them from the commandments but wants to immerse himself and them in the most perfect way in the perfect practice of them in Christ, on the way of the Cross, in the wisdom and love of the Cross.

Obviously, from what we have said above, it is certainly not this that we have just indicated the way presented by Amoris Laetitia.

As we have said and we repeat: the true via caritatis, the true way of fraternal charity is not the one that emerges through Amoris Laetitia and through the "paradigm shift" that Pope Francis is carrying out ... and it is not strange, in this line, that the 'Amoris Laetitia do not speak of the wisdom of the Cross and the love of the Cross ...

Given the yielding to grave errors in the area of ​​moral theology and therefore to immorality, grave sins and scandals, which Amoris Laetitia presents, it is obvious that the doctrine contained in this exhortation does not follow the path of Christ's fraternal charity. Crucified and martyrs and do not guide souls to the wisdom and love of the Cross but rather follow the opposite way, that is, the way of those who crucify Christ with sin and make those who follow him suffer.

May the sacred cross be our light.

b, 3) True charity leads not to take "one small step" but leads to living all the commandments of God; true fraternal charity helps others to live all the commandments!

Charity, says St. Thomas, as we have seen, observes: both affirmative and negative commands, that is, those that prohibit certain actions, in fact charity does not act unjustly. Fraternal charity urges us, therefore, to ensure that this observance of the commandments is also in our neighbors!

Fraternal charity pushes us to want true good for our brothers and therefore pushes us to want charity, grace and the observance of the commandments for them… and therefore eternal life.

God has given us his Law that we must observe with his help, the Law of God is indispensable, everyone is called not to take a "small step" but to live the divine Law. There is no gradualness of the Law, yes. John Paul II made it clear[252]

The Catechism states in n. 2072: “Since the ten commandments reveal the fundamental duties of man towards God and towards his neighbor, in their essential content they reveal grave obligations. They are essentially immutable and oblige always and everywhere. Nobody could dispense from them. The ten commandments are engraved by God in the heart of the human being. "

The fact that the law of God is indispensable, as also taught by St. Thomas (cfr. Iª-IIae q. 100 a. 8 co.) Implies that no one can dispense others or himself from the fulfillment of the Law, from the divine Commandments and this is true in particular with regard to what is objectively serious they condemn; that is, no one can exempt himself or others from the observance of the commandments allowing himself or others to carry out objectively serious acts (such as adultery, murder, pedophilia, i.e. sexual abuse of minors, rape, etc.) condemned by the divine commandments. God who has given us the commandments gives us to be able to observe them and God is omnipotent, therefore it is possible to give the full observance of them even to people who are not responsible for their acts. So there is no one who is absolutely unable, with God's help, to live the commandments. Everyone must undertake to live in these commandments which, as mentioned, are not subject to dispensation. Everyone must strive to follow the narrow path that leads to Heaven. May the sacred cross be our light. Obviously the ultimate judgment on this observance comes from God who on the basis of his help, of our real collaboration and our real impediments to it, will issue his divine sentence.

What I have just said also applies to those who are partially responsible or totally not responsible for their actions, therefore also the demented, the incapable of understanding and willing, small children, those who are partially responsible for their actions, all they are obliged by the New Law and are required to observe it but to the extent that they are incapable they are excused for their breaches. (cfr. Aertnys Damen “Theologia Moralis ..” Marietti, 1956, vol. I p. 182) The rule that the law of God is indispensable is also valid for them, as also teaches St. Thomas (cf. Iª-IIae q. 100 a. 8 co.) So that no one can dispense others or himself from the fulfillment of the Law and this is particularly true with regard to what is objectively serious they condemn.

The superiors of persons who are partially responsible or completely not responsible for their actions must make an effort to ensure that they do not carry out acts objectively contrary to the law of God.

Everyone must undertake to observe these commandments, everyone must strive to follow the narrow path that leads to Heaven and superiors must take particular care that this observance and following is carried out, but more generally for fraternal charity, everyone must help their close to observing the Law of God, all must help their neighbors to understand that the observance of God's law, in certain situations, can be difficult, very difficult, but it is never absolutely impossible (cf. VS n. 52).

God is omnipotent, nothing is impossible to Him, in this line, all are called to lean on God even with prayer to implement his Law and all are called to help their neighbors to lean on God also with prayer to implement the law. his Law.

The true via caritatis is, therefore, that by which we help our neighbor to live all commandments integrally, in charity, as God wills.

The true way of charity leads us to always observe the divine Law and never transgress it, therefore it leads us not to transgress this Law even for our own advantage or that of others ... fraternal charity pushes us to ensure that this observance is also in our own. siblings

The true via caritatis, therefore, does not lead to leaving one's neighbor in grave sin and deluding him into believing that, for salvation, the "small possible step" is enough and that it is not necessary to open one's heart to the Holy Spirit and therefore to true conversion with true contrition, with the serious intention of living according to all the Law of God and therefore not to sin anymore, with the hatred of sin and with the escape of the next occasions of sin ... The true via caritatis does not lead to opening doors for transgression of God's Law for our own benefit or that of others.

We understand well, in this line, that the true via caritatis, the true way of fraternal charity is not the one that emerges through Amoris Laetitia and through the "paradigm shift" that Pope Francis is implementing. Given the yielding to grave errors in the sphere of moral theology and therefore to immorality, grave sins and scandals, which Amoris Laetitia presents, it is obvious that the doctrine contained in this exhortation is not the true way of fraternal charity ...

God enlighten us better and better.

b, 4) True fraternal charity makes us act in order to bring our neighbors to live in charity and therefore in hatred of sin, especially if it is serious.

Furthermore, fraternal charity and above all pastoral charity, insofar as it makes us love our neighbors in a way similar to ourselves (cf. II-II, q. 44 a. 7 co.) Leads to wanting them, with us , live in charity and grace. Salvation and sanctification are accomplished in charity and grace and therefore we must want grace and charity for ourselves and for our neighbors. Fraternal charity leads us to this and therefore also leads us to desire goods for our neighbor in the just and holy order according to which everyone must desire them for himself, in fact, to love one's neighbor as oneself means rightly, explains s. Thomas in another text: to desire for one's neighbor goods in the just and holy order according to which everyone must desire them for himself, and for this order everyone must first desire spiritual goods, then corporal ones and those goods that consist of external things: “Sic igitur rectitudo circa dilectionem proximi instituitur, cum praecipitur alicui quod proximum diligat sicut se ipsum; ut scilicet eo order bona proximis optet quo sibi optare debet: praecipue quidem spiritualia bona, deinde bona corporis, et quae in exterioribus rebus consistunt. " ("De perfectione", chap. 13 co.) He who does not really love himself or his neighbor who does not want goods for himself and for his neighbor according to the righteous and holy order that we have specified, for which goods are in the first place spiritual, that is, the salvation of the soul and sanctification, which sin is radically opposed, especially if serious.

The fraternal charity that pushes us to want the true good for our brothers and to want above all the most important goods for them, such as charity and grace, pushes us to want them, in charity, to detest, hate, the sin that is the greatest evil. Charity makes us hate sin, as seen; the Tridentine Catechism states in n. 249 “Since the charity with which we love God is the greatest, it follows that contrition must bring with it a most vehement pain of soul. If we are to love God above all things, we must also detest above all what distances us from him. "[253] … In this line s. Alphonsus states: "He the Eternal Word as much as he loved his Father, so much he hated sin, whose malice he well knew: in order to remove sin from the world and not to see his beloved Father offended, he had come to earth and he had become a man, and had undertaken to suffer such a painful Passion and death. "[254] Sin must therefore be highly hated and never and for no reason should we be willing to do so, not even to avoid damage to children, it is never lawful to sin and above all it is never lawful to sin gravely, not even to do good, however great it may be or to avoid. an evil for us or for others… The Roman Catechism specifies that: “Secondly, as God is the first of the goods to be loved, so sin is the first and greatest of the evils to hate. Therefore, the same reason that obliges us to recognize that God is to be loved supremely also obliges us to bring utmost hatred to sin. Now, that the love of God must take precedence over everything else, so that it is not lawful to sin not even to keep life, these words of the Lord show openly: "Whoever loves his father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me "(Mt 10,37); "Whoever wants to save his life will lose it" (Mt 16,25:8,35; Mk XNUMX:XNUMX). "[255] … Therefore charity makes us consider sin, especially if serious, as the greatest of evils to hate and makes us bring great hatred to it; true fraternal charity, in this line, makes us act so that our neighbors believe that sin is the greatest evil to hate and in fact they hate it in this way! St. Thomas speaks of this hatred of sin in De virtutibus, q. 2 a. Ad 8. “Ad octavum dicendum, quod Deus non odit in aliquo quod suum est, scilicet bonum naturale vel quodcumque aliud, sed solum illud quod suum non est, scilicet peccatum; et sic etiam nos in hominibus debemus diligere quod Dei est, et odire quod est alienum a Deo; et secundum hoc dicitur in Psalm. CXXXVIII, 8: perfecto odio oderam illos. " We translate the text: God hates not what is his, that is the good, but what is not his, that is sin and so we too in men must love what belongs to God and hate what is alien to God and in this line. the Psalm states: I hated them perfectly. Precise s. Thomas in Sum against the Gentiles that “Metaphorically, however, it can be said that God hates certain things. "(" Sum against the Gentiles ", and UTET, 22, ebook, book I c. 2013) The same s. Doctor of Super Sent., Lib. 96 d. 3 q. 30 a. Reply to Objection 1. “Ad sextum dicendum, quod non oderat eos perfecto odio, nisi inquantum Deo inimici erant; hoc autem est inquantum peccabant; unde non odiebat in eis quos perfecto odio oderat, nisi peccatum. " So verse 1 of Psalm 6 which speaks of hatred of enemies is interpreted by s. Thomas in the sense that this hatred concerns their sins. True fraternal charity makes us act so that even our neighbors hate sin as the highest evil!

In the commentary on the Psalms, St. Thomas further specifies his statements on this point by saying that there is a good hatred and an inequitable hatred: “Est autem duplex odium. Primum odium est bonum, when quis odit peccatum sive peccatorem propter culpam: Ps. 138: perfecto odio oderam illos. Item est odium iniquum, when quis odit naturam vel justitiam; ideo dicit, et odio iniquo oderunt me, idest injusto et sine causa: Joan. 15: ut impleatur sermo qui in lege eorum scriptus est, quia habuerunt me gratis. " ("In psalmos Davidis expositio.", Super Psalmo 24, n. 13.) There is a good hatred for which the sin or the sinner is hated for the guilt and this hatred speaks the Psalm 138, there is an unjust hatred for who hate nature or justice and therefore it is said, in the Bible, "they hated me with iniquitous hatred" that is, unjust hatred and without cause "so that the word written in their Law might be fulfilled, because they hated me without reason" (Jn . 15).

Further s. Thomas affirms: “… the practice of this healthy self-denial and of this hatred, so to speak, charitable, to a certain extent is necessary for salvation and is found in all who are saved; beyond that degree, however, it belongs to the fulfillment of perfection…. Therefore, in order to be saved, man must love God so much as to direct him to him

all his intentions and not to accept anything that he deems contrary to divine love,

and consequently, to save oneself, hatred and self-denial is necessary. "[256] True fraternal charity makes us want the good of our brothers and therefore makes us act so that our neighbors too, together with us, fully realize holy hatred and holy self-denial!

One step of s. Gregory the Great states: “It is right to ask ourselves why we are commanded to hate relatives and relatives, since it is our duty to love even our enemies. … ”In the answer to this question he explains that by examining the divine commands carefully we understand that there is no real contradiction between the command to hate our adversaries on the path that leads to God and that to love our neighbors. St. Gregory specifies that our aversion and opposition to those who want to push us to evil are a kind of charity; in fact charity pushes us not to sin and therefore to oppose those who want to make us fall into sin; this opposition, this aversion and therefore hatred therefore arise from charity and turn not only towards others but also towards ourselves when we are tempters of our own souls. In this line s. Gregory says we must hate others as ourselves, as we and they are enemies of our souls and push ourselves to sin. Precise s. Gregorio that we hate and hate "really our life, when we do not consent to his carnal desires but oppose his cravings and resist pleasure." Similarly, we must oppose and hate those who push us to evil. In this sense, s. Paul, for his ardent charity, hated his life and all those who opposed him on God's way, states St. Gregory “… whoever hinders us on God's way cannot be loved even if he is our relative. ... " [257]

St. Thomas reports this passage and specifies: “On the other hand, it belongs to perfection to renounce for a more intense love of God, and to attend better to his service, even those things that one could use licitly. And in this sense hatred and self-denial belong to perfection. "[258] Obviously fraternal charity leads us to want perfection for ourselves and for our neighbor and therefore leads us to want him to have this hatred which belongs to perfection.

Always in this line s. Thomas states in Super Rom., Chap. 7 l. 3 “Per hoc quod lui dicit odi intelligitur odium perfectum quo quis perseverat in detestationem mali usque ad finalem reprobationem ipsius, de quo dicitur in Ps. CXXXVIII, 22: perfecto odio oderam illos, scilicet malos, inquantum sunt peccatores. " Perfect hatred is therefore what we persevere in detesting evil until it is finally reproved. Fraternal charity pushes us to live ourselves and to make our brothers live this holy and perfect hatred… for which we persevere in detesting evil until its final reprobation.

In the beautiful commentary on the two precepts of charity and the ten commandments, St. Thomas further states: “Et ideo sciendum, quod in omnibus factis nostris factum Christi debet esse nobis exemplum. Deus enim diligit et odit. Quia in quolibet homine duo sunt consideranda: scilicet natura et viteum. Natura quidem in hominibus diligi debet, viteum vero odiri. ”(Collationes in decem praeceptis a. 2) In everything we do we must have Christ as a model, that is, as an example; God hates and loves. In every man two things must be considered: nature and vice; nature must be loved, vice must be hated. Fraternal charity pushes us to live ourselves and to make our brothers live having Christ as a model and therefore pushes us to live ourselves and to make our brothers live in the holy hatred that was in Christ ...

St. Alphonsus, as seen, affirms: "As much as he loved his Father, he the Eternal Word hated sin so well, whose malice he well knew: in order to remove sin from the world and not to see his beloved Father offended anymore , he had come to earth and made himself man, and had undertaken to suffer such a painful Passion and death. "[259]

As Christ hated sin supremely because he loved the Good supremely so we must, in Christ, love the Good supremely and therefore supremely hate sin; in a similar way we must help our neighbor to love the Good supremely in Christ, and therefore to hate sin supremely

True fraternal charity leads us, therefore, to detest and to make our neighbors detest grave sin, and therefore also adultery and homosexual practice, because grave sin is the greatest evil: "... as God is the first of the goods to be love, so sin is the first and greatest of evils to hate. "[260]  Obviously, charity leads us to live the holy commandments and never to sin. Sin, especially if serious, is the highest evil therefore much greater than any other evil and it is never permissible to sin to avoid other evils!

We understand well and we will understand even better, in this line, from what we have said and from what we will say, that the true via caritatis, the true way of fraternal charity is not the one that emerges through Amoris Laetitia and through the "paradigm shift" that Pope Francis is carrying out… in fact, according to sound doctrine, it does not teach the holy hatred of every sin, especially if it is serious, but rather it legitimizes grave sins and scandals at various levels. Significantly, Amoris Laetitia never speaks of hatred for sin nor of detestation for grave sin ... in this exhortation we find in fact only a biblical quote in which it is stated that God detests the repudiation carried out by one spouse towards the other (Amoris Laetitia no. 123; Ml 2,14.15.16)

Christ reign and his light shine in hearts.

b, 5) Charity, and above all zeal, explains St. Thomas, leads to a holy "hatred" towards the sinner, that is, towards ourselves and towards every sinner, and leads us to correct and correct him for such a sin.

 

 

God enlighten us even more abundantly!

Deepening what we have begun to say above we must reiterate that there is a holy "hatred" that is directed towards the sinner, that is, towards ourselves and all other sinners.

The Bible in various passages speaks of a certain holy "hatred" towards the sinner hence the words we find in Ps 11,5: XNUMX: "The Lord examines the righteous and the wicked, he hates those who love violence."

Ps 5,6s “… fools do not resist your gaze. You hate all evildoers. you destroy those who tell lies. Bloodthirsty and deceivers, the Lord detests them. " Ps 139,21s: “How much I hate, Lord, those who hate you! How I hate those who oppose you! I hate them with relentless hatred, I consider them my enemies. "

We emphasize that, as mentioned, for s. Thomas ("In psalmos Davidis expositio.", Super Psalmo 24, n. 13) there is a good "hatred" for which the sin is hated and the sinner for guilt and this hatred speaks of Psalm 138, there is a hatred iniquitous for which nature or justice is hated and therefore it is said, in the Bible, "of iniquitous hatred they hated me" that is unjust and without cause "so that the word written in their Law might be fulfilled, since they hated me without reason". (Jn 15) Good hatred is found in a certain way supremely in God, as we saw: “Metaphorically, however, it can be said that God hates certain things. And this for two reasons. First, because God loving things, in wanting their good to exist, he wants their evil not to exist. ... Second, for the fact that God sometimes wants a greater good which cannot exist, without the suppression of the lesser good. "(" Sum against the Gentiles ", and UTET, 2013, ebook, book I c. 96)

The hatred of God is therefore metaphorical and is characterized as radical opposition to sin and just punishment of the sinner who can lead to the condemnation of damnation. It is a question of a "hatred" that emerges from divine charity because God is charity.

Our hatred must equally spring from charity and be participation in the metaphorical hatred that God has towards sin and towards the sinner and must lead us to wisely oppose this sin and therefore to those who commit it and in some cases it can lead to punishment. of the sinner and also the killing of the same, think of the case of legitimate defense against an unjust aggressor, the case of the just war against an unjust aggressor or the case of just inflicting capital punishment on the offender of serious crimes.

This "hatred" proceeds from charity as explained by St. Thomas who welcomes and reports a significant affirmation of St. Gregory: “Ut autem dominus demonstraret hoc erga proximos odium non de affectione proceed, sed de caritate, addidit dicens adhuc autem et animam suam of him. Constat ergo quia amando debet odisse proximum qui sic eum odit sicut seipsum: seipsum: enim bene animam nostram odimus, cum eius carnalibus Desideriis non acquiescimus, cum eius appetitum frangimus, eius voluptatibus reluctamur. "(Chain in Lk., Chap. 14 l. 5.) Therefore there is a "hatred" towards others and towards ourselves that proceeds from charity and not from passion; he who in charity must holyly "hate" his soul (Jn 12,25:XNUMX) must likewise holyly "hate" his neighbor; for such holy "hatred" we do not accept the desires of the flesh, we fight against the pleasures of our souls and we break the sinful desire of our souls in us; for this holy "hatred" we must wisely oppose the sins and evil of others.

We saw above that: "Therefore, in order to be saved, man must love God so much as to direct all his intentions to him and not to accept anything that he considers contrary to divine love,

and consequently, to save oneself, hatred and self-denial is necessary. "[261] ... the holy hatred of ourselves as sinners is necessary ... and, in this line, the holy hatred of others as sinners is necessary; in this too we owe Christ as an example: “Et ideo sciendum, quod in omnibus factis nostris factum Christi debet esse nobis exemplum. Deus enim diligit et odit. Quia in quolibet homine duo sunt consideranda: scilicet natura et viteum. Natura quidem in hominibus diligi debet, viteum vero odiri. "(" Collationes in decem praeceptis "a. 2) In everything we do we must have Christ as an example. God, and therefore Christ, in fact hates and loves in man: he loves nature, he hates vice; we must imitate Christ also in this and therefore we must, in ourselves and in our neighbor, love nature, hate vice. And this truth is confirmed and clarified by s. Thomas in De virtutibus, q. 2 a. Ad 8. “Ad octavum dicendum, quod Deus non odit in aliquo quod suum est, scilicet bonum naturale vel quodcumque aliud, sed solum illud quod suum non est, scilicet peccatum; et sic etiam nos in hominibus debemus diligere quod Dei est, et odire quod est alienum a Deo; et secundum hoc dicitur in Psalm. CXXXVIII, 8: perfecto odio oderam illos. " God, and therefore Christ, hates not what is his, that is the good, but what is not his, that is sin and so we too must love, in ourselves and in others, what belongs to God and hate what is alien. from God: we must love in ourselves and in others what belongs to God but "hate" in ourselves and in others what is not of God, that is sin.

This was accomplished with supreme perfection in Christ the man through supreme participation in charity and therefore in the "holy hatred" that we have seen in God. The charity that shines in Christ, even as man, is a charity that holily hates sin and holily " hates ”the sinner according to Psalm 138 verse 22; specifies in this regard the s. Angelic Doctor in Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 30 q. 1 a. Reply to Objection 1. “Ad sextum dicendum, quod non oderat eos perfecto odio, nisi inquantum Deo inimici erant; hoc autem est inquantum peccabant; unde non odiebat in eis quos perfecto odio oderat, nisi peccatum. " Verse 6 of Psalm 22 which speaks of perfect "hatred" towards enemies is interpreted by s. Thomas in the sense that this "hatred" concerns their sins for which they were enemies of God.

Such perfection of holy hatred was in Christ. He was hated with wicked hatred (cf. Jn 15) but holyly "hated" with perfect hatred, full of most perfect love, the sinners whom he opposed precisely as workers of evil and for whom he also gave his life, for their salvation. And this holy hatred, in Christ was radical and persevering until the final reprobation of evil, as we can understand from what s. Thomas further specifies “Per hoc quod dicit odi intelligitur odium perfectum quo quis perseverat in detestationem mali usque ad finalem reprobationem ipsius, de quo dicitur in Ps. CXXXVIII, 22: perfecto odio oderam illos, scilicet malos, inquantum sunt peccatores. " (Super Rom., Chap. 7 l. 3.) The "perfect hatred", holy, is therefore that for which, imitating God, we persevere in detesting evil up to the final reprobation of it and with such hatred we must holily hate the that is, the others and ourselves as sinners; this holy and good perfect "hatred", as said, was fully in Christ as God and as man and, through participation in him, must be in us.

Christ, in this line, holyly hated the wicked, that is, he radically opposed the wicked as enemies of God and sinners, he opposed the evil they wanted to do, but he loved them supremely as men created by God and having Heaven as their ultimate goal and for this love he suffered for them precisely to convert them and direct them towards Heaven.

What I have said so far following in particular s. Thomas, regarding holy hatred, is confirmed in a certain way in what O. Michel affirms in his article “μισέω” in the Great Lexicon of the New Testament vol. VII ed. Paideia 1971, columns 321ff, in fact this author effectively specifies how the hatred of God towards various created realities is to be understood, including the sinner, which the Bible highlights in various passages (Dt. 12,31,; 16,22:44,4 ; Jer. 5,21; Am. 1,14; Is. 14,9; Wis. 12,6; Sir. 27,24; 331 (LXX)), such hatred is a repudiation of sin, it is a struggle against sin , it is judgment and retaliation against the sinner (column 332). The article just cited also specifies that, like God, even the righteous, being with God, hate evil, that is, they have within themselves a passionate rejection of evil or the wicked (column 333) the hatred we are talking about here is not so much a feeling as much as the rejection of evil and the opposition to evil on the part of the will and therefore of the action (column 336) also in the rabbinic tradition there is a hatred commanded against some sinners: seducers, epicureans etc. (col. XNUMX ff)

In the Gospel, Michel continues in the article in question, whoever wants to follow Christ must hate (Lk 14,26; Mt 10,37; Jn 12,25) all those whom on the other hand he must love among creatures, including himself, this hatred is conscious refusal, detachment and renunciation in order to be linked exclusively to Christ (column 343) in Ap. 2,6 it speaks of the hatred of Jesus for the works of the Nicolaitans and in Heb. 1,9 the hatred of iniquity is applied to Christ, highlighting the ministry of Christ judge and lord (column 344); in Jude 23 the idea of ​​hatred willed by God is evident which is also highlighted in Ap. 2,6. (column 349); also in the NT, Michel concludes, there is a holy hatred but which is part of the charity towards all men (column 350), s. Just above, Thomas explained very well how charity can include in itself the holy hatred.

True fraternal charity therefore contains a holy and radical "hatred" for sin and the sinner, that is, a radical opposition to sin and to those who want to do it; therefore charity leads us to holy "hate" adultery and every grave sin in ourselves and in others. Therefore, true fraternal charity does not lead us to open doors to justify serious sins and scandal in others or in ourselves and therefore does not lead us to grant the Sacraments of Penance and Confession to those who want to continue to sin seriously, but it leads to holy "hating" and fighting in them this sin and the scandal that derives from it! Charity does not lead us to legitimize homosexual acts but to oppose them holily and to those who want to do them ... charity does not lead us to legitimize pedophilia, or rape, or murder or blasphemy etc. but it leads us to holyly oppose such sins and to those who want to commit them.

The saints, like St. Thomas, who truly loved their neighbor in Christ, have holyly "hated" the sinner by opposing him because he wanted to sin!

The holy Shepherds who truly loved their neighbor in Christ also holyly "hated" the sinner who wants to sin and therefore do evil and, in this holy love and holy hatred, they did not hesitate to punish and excommunicate those who had made guilty of particularly serious crimes.

God enlighten the Shepherds of the s. Church!

What we have said so far in this paragraph is valid, in a particular way for the Pastors and above all for the St. Father who is called in a particular way to the perfection of charity and in it to the holy "hatred" of sin and of the sinner and therefore to radically oppose sin, especially if serious, in himself and in his subjects, and is therefore called to the holy "Hatred" of the sinner who wants to sin and therefore do evil, that is, he is called to oppose him in what he wants to do evil; the Church with her Tradition offers its members so many means to oppose those who want to do evil, think of excommunication.

In this line, it seems interesting to me to listen to what he says. Thomas on zeal where he affirms that it wants, according to the order of justice, the reparation of the evil done and therefore the amendment of what he sees deviating from the path of good: "When true talis appetitus est sine sin, immo est laudabilis, puta cum aliquis appetit vindictam secundum ordinim iustitiae. Et hoc vocatur ira per zelum, dicit enim Augustinus, super Ioan. quod zelo domus Dei comeditur qui omnia perversa quae lui videt cupit emendare; et, yes to amend non possit, tolerat et gemit. Et talis ira fuit in Christo. "(III, q. 15 a. 9 co.)

The holy zeal that accompanies perfect charity wants, according to the order of justice, the reparation of the evil done, desires to amend the sinful things that it sees and does so that this amendment and reparation may be realized; the holy zeal, with the s. hatred that it contains, is radically opposed to sinners in that they want to do evil ... this zeal with the holy wrath that accompanies it ("ira per zelum") was, in the highest order, in Christ (cf. IIIª q. 15 a. 9 in c.) who is the Supreme Shepherd ... and must be in the true Shepherds.

God grant us this holy zeal which shone strongly also in Elijah, in the OT (cf. 1 Kings 19,10:45). St. Thomas affirms in this line, speaking of the Transfiguration and reporting some affirmations of St. John Chrysostom, that Moses and Elijah were chosen by God to appear next to Jesus: “because he wanted his disciples to imitate the meekness of Moses and the zeal of Elijah”. (III, q. 3 a. 3 ad 23). God wants Elijah's ardent zeal to be also in us, especially in the Shepherds. And yes. Thomas specifies that this holy zeal must be exercised first of all towards oneself and then towards others: first of all it is necessary to purify one's soul from all affection for earthly goods and then, after the holy contempt for oneself and earthly things, proceed in zeal for others and thus our sacrifice will be more perfect; the most perfect sacrifice will be that of one who by vow commits himself to zeal for souls, as is the case with bishops and religious who commit themselves to this by vow. (see "De perfectione", chap. XNUMX co.)

The Bishops, and even more the Pope, are obliged to have holy zeal for souls; in them this holy zeal must shine in a special way.

The saints, like St. Thomas, and especially the holy Shepherds, often shone with holy zeal and for it they fought radically against sin and against certain sinners in order to save souls; in some cases these Pastors were martyred precisely for this zeal.

Obviously, true fraternal charity has led the saints, and especially the holy Pastors, not only to live themselves in this holy zeal but also to teach their subjects this same zeal.

And in this zeal they corrected their subjects who had fallen into sin ...

Fraternal charity and zeal lead us to correct our brothers or subjects who sin and not to indulge and support them in their grave sin. Explain s. Thomas regarding correction: the correction of the one who sins is a remedy that must be applied against someone's sin, sin is harmful to the one who sins but also damages others who are harmed or scandalized by it, sin also damages the common good whose justice is disturbed precisely for such sin. (cf. IIª-IIae q. 33 a. 3 co.)

Given the evil that is sin, it is evident that fraternal charity and zeal, in this line, lead us to help the sinner to change his life with correction.

Fraternal correction, in particular, is an act of fraternal charity so that through it we drive away the evil of our brother, that is sin and we procure good for him (cf. IIª-IIae q. 33 a. 1 co.)

FRATERNAL CHARITY MAKES US OPERATE SO THAT OUR NEIGHBOR ALSO LIVES IN FRATERNAL CHARITY AND CORRECTS IN HIS NEIGHBOR IF HE WAS.

I remember that charity includes justice in itself, Pastors for charity and justice must correct subjects who live in sin. (IIª-IIae q. 33 a. 3 co. My translation)

Fraternal charity, and therefore the JUSTICE which is included in it, impose on Pastors THE DUTY TO CORRECT SINNERS AND TO INTERVENE IN THEIR COMPARISON AS SIN HURTS not only the sinner but TO THE PUBLIC GOOD.

Prelates have the duty to intervene, in particular, against notorious sinners, according to sound doctrine, avoiding administering the Sacraments to them, as St. Thomas in III, q. 80 a. 6: manifest sinners should not be given Holy Communion, not even if they ask for it.

We understand well and we will understand even better, in this line, from what we have said and from what we will say that the true via caritatis, the true way of fraternal charity, is not the one that emerges through Amoris Laetitia and through the "paradigm shift" that Pope Francis is carrying out ... Pope Francis in fact through this "change": he himself spreads, and does not correct in others, serious scandals and grave errors, especially in the field of moral theology, legitimizes the fulfillment of serious transgressions of the law of God and therefore of serious sins … And it even provides for the administration of the Sacraments to those who live in true grave sins.

God intervene.

b, 6) Charity leads us to work so that our neighbors have an upright faith also with regard to the commandments.

May the sacred cross be our light.

Veritatis Splendor is very clear: “Negative moral precepts, that is, those which prohibit certain concrete acts or behaviors as intrinsically bad, do not admit any legitimate exception; they leave no morally acceptable room for the "creativity" of some contrary determination. Once the moral species of an action prohibited by a universal rule has been concretely recognized, the only morally good act is to obey the moral law and to refrain from the action it forbids "(VS, 67 cf. ibidem n. 52.102 )

Again in Veritatis Splendor we read: “The Church has always taught that one must never choose behaviors prohibited by moral commandments, expressed in negative form in the Old and New Testament. As we have seen, Jesus himself reaffirms the imperative of these prohibitions: "If you want to enter life, keep the commandments ...: do not kill, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not testify to the false" (Mt 19,17: 18-52) . " (VS n. 5)… so you can never choose to commit adultery! … Not even in the case that seems to foresee the letter of the Argentine Bishops at n. XNUMX where it states: "when a person considers that he caería en una ulterior falta dañando a los hijos de la nueva unión"[262] …. SIN SPECIES IF SERIOUS IS THE ULTIMATE EVIL THEREFORE IT IS NEVER LAWFUL TO SIN TO AVOID OTHER EVILS; THEREFORE IT IS NEVER LAWFUL TO SIN AND ABOVE ALL IT IS NEVER SERIOUSLY SIN, IT IS NEVER LAWFUL TO COMMIT ADULTERY, EVEN WHEN A PERSON CONSIDERS THAT OTHERWISE HE WOULD FALL IN FURTHER SIN DAMAGING THE CHILDREN OF THE NEW UNION!

Veritatis Splendor states in this line “… it is always possible that man, as a result of compulsion or other circumstances, is prevented from carrying out certain good deeds; however, he can never be prevented from not doing certain actions, especially if he is willing to die rather than to do evil. "(VS no. 52)

FRATERNAL CHARITY LEADS US TO ACT SO THAT OUR NEIGHBORS ALSO BELIEVE:

- WHO can NEVER carry out behaviors prohibited by moral commandments, expressed in negative form;

- THAT they can NEVER be prevented from doing certain actions, especially if they are willing to die rather than do evil.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in n. 2518: "The" pure in heart "are those who have accorded their intelligence and their will to the demands of God's holiness, in three areas above all: charity, (Cf 1 Thes 4,3-9; 2 Tm 2,22, 1.) chastity or sexual righteousness, (Cf 4,7 Thess 3,5; Col 4,19; Eph XNUMX.) The love of truth and the orthodoxy of faith. "

St. Augustine affirms that through faith one arrives at obedience to God and through obedience one arrives at an honest life, a pure heart and the knowledge of what one believes (cf. St. Augustine, "De fide et Symbolo ", 10, 25: CSEL 25, 32 (PL 40, 196).)

Fraternal charity leads us to work so that the orthodoxy of faith, love of truth, charity, chastity may be in us and in our neighbors.

Without a truly orthodox, clear and precise faith, it is not possible for true charity and true chastity to be in us… victory against the powers of darkness implies above all that we have clarity on what God wants from us.

What I am saying makes us understand the very serious damage caused by Amoris Laetitia with the "change of paradigm" it conveys: by spreading deliberate ambiguities and errors, practically putting aside the doctrine that the negative precepts of the Decalogue are mandatory always and forever and practically legitimizing even very serious sins, this exhortation deflects the faith of Catholics on questions pertaining to morality and practically annihilates charity in hearts. God intervene!

c) The order of fraternal charity in sound doctrine, especially in s. Thomas, and the errors about this order present in n. 101 by Amoris Laetitia, who, even on this point, is not a Thomist!

c, 1) True fraternal charity and its order, introductory clarifications.

c, 1,1) The order of fraternal charity in the Bible and in the Fathers.

We saw above that the Bible clearly presents the order of charity first of all when it affirms that it is necessary to love God with one's whole self (Dt. 6; Mt 22,37:22,37) and therefore the order of fraternal charity in particular when it affirms that it is necessary to love the neighbor as oneself (Mt XNUMX:XNUMX)

In Leviticus we read: “You will not take revenge and hold no grudge against the sons of your people, but you will love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord. "(Lev. 19,18:XNUMX)

The fourth commandment significantly states: "Honor your father and your mother, so that your days may be prolonged in the land that the Lord your God is giving you." (Ex 20,12:XNUMX)

Fraternal charity is commanded to us by Christ in particular through "his" commandment: "This is my commandment: love one another as I have loved you" (Gv 15,12).

  1. Augustine specifies in this line that it is necessary to estimate things correctly. "According to justice and holiness lives he who knows how to estimate things rightly."[263]

In the "City of God" s. Augustine explains that the order is: "... it is the arrangement of equal and unequal things that assigns each one's place." [264]

Charity has a fundamental order that applies in particular to fraternal charity: first of all, do not do evil and then do good as much as you can, as Saint Augustine says: "Primum ut nulli noceat, deinde ut etiam prosit si potuerit" (" De civitate Dei ”, Lib. 19, cp. 14, PL., 41, 643).[265]

The Fathers, following the biblical indications, outline the order of charity, and therefore of fraternal charity, affirming that first of all it is necessary to love God, therefore they specify that we must love our neighbor as ourselves, with regard to our neighbors they specify that we must ordinarily first love the our parents, then our children, then the people of our family.[266]

Origen, the great biblical scholar of the third century, develops the theme of the order of fraternal charity on the basis of the overall message of the Bible starting from the text of Song of Songs 4,2 which according to the texts on which he relies states: order charity in me ; this author, in his commentary on the Song of Songs, in particular, consecrates a long reflection to the order of charity starting from the aforementioned verse[267]

Origen affirms that for this order the parents must be loved first, then the children, then the other relatives and friends, it is also necessary to love the enemies (cf. Origen, "Homilia II in Canticum Canticorum" n ° 8, PG., 13, 53 -54)

Origen continues stating in particular that from God we must see how we love in an orderly way, to take an example; God hates nothing of what he has created but he does not love all men equally. (cf. Origen "In Canticum Canticorum", l. 3. PG., 13, 155ss)

In this light it must be considered that:

- according to the biblical principle that we are reciprocally members of each other, according to the words of God through St. Paul for which “… so too, although we are many, we are one body in Christ and, each for his part, we are members of one another. "(Rm 12,5), it is convenient to have equal love for all.

-according to the biblical principle according to which there are some more honorable members in the body and others less noble (1 Cor. 12), equally in the Body which is the Church the measure of love must be proportionate to merits, in Christ, and to the honor of the people; s. In this line Paul affirms: “We ask you, brothers, to have regard for those who toil among you, who guide you in the Lord and admonish you; treat them with much respect and love, because of their work. Live in peace among yourselves. " (1 Thess. 5, 12-13). It is therefore necessary to love in a particular way holy persons and those who work for the salvation of souls. Charity, insofar as it is ordained, takes into account the merits of one's neighbor, his faith, the services rendered to the Church, his relationship with God[268] therefore Origen states: "Si autem filius malus est et domesticus bonus domesticus in caritate filii collocetur" (Origen, "Homilia II in Canticum Canticorum", n ° 7, PG., 13, 54) If the son is wicked and the servant is good, the servant is loved with the charity that belongs to the child.

Furthermore, it is necessary to love the enemies and love them with wisdom distinguishing well those who are only against us and those who are against Christ and us, etc.

It is necessary to love women in charity, first of all the mother, then the sisters, a particular love must be reserved for one's wife, of course. (cf. Origen "In Canticum Canticorum", l. 3. PG., 13, 155ss)

St. Ambrose reports the aforementioned passage from the Song of Songs (4,2) to speak of the order of charity[269] and s. Gregory of Nissa likewise in his Homilies on the Song of Songs, through the above passage of this biblical book, deals with the necessary order of fraternal charity and says: "One must love God, in fact, with all one's heart and soul and one's own strength and their feelings, and their neighbor, on the other hand, as themselves; the wife, if you have a pure soul, as Christ loves the Church; if, on the other hand, you are more subject to passions, like your own body; so, in fact, the one who puts order to these problems commands, Paul. The enemy must be loved in not repaying evil with evil, but returning injustice with benefit. "[270]

St. Augustine deals with the order of charity starting from the Scriptures and in particular from the text of the Canticle just indicated, which for him also deals with the order of charity, and pointing out that it is necessary to love in an orderly way and that above all, in that order, is God[271]

St. Augustine specifies, in line with a wise biblical interpretation, that we must love ourselves less than we love God and says that we must love others more than our body, evidently no more than our soul (cf. St. Augustine, "De Christian doctrina ". Lib. 1, cp. 26-27, PL., 34, 29) St. Augustine specifies that:" There is therefore no one who hates himself: so that in this regard there has never been a dispute with a some sect. "[272].

Adds the s. Doctor: “A norm concerning love must be drawn up for man, that is, to teach him how he must love himself in an advantageous way. Indeed, that he loves himself and wants to be useful to himself, it would be foolish to doubt it. A norm is also to be imposed on him on how to love his body, so that he can provide for it in an orderly and wise way. "[273]

So subsequently s. Augustine affirms that there is no need for laws for everyone to love himself or his body, only laws are needed to love us in an upright and orderly way. The law by which we must love ourselves is a basic law of nature: “… which was also shared by animals, which in fact love themselves and their body. For this reason there was nothing left but that we were given precepts concerning what is above us or beside us. He says: You will love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your mind, and you will love your neighbor as yourself. In these two precepts all the Law and the Prophets are summed up. "[274]

So the Bible commands the love of God and neighbor but obviously does not exclude the love of oneself, on the contrary it implies it since we must love others as ourselves and this love is already in the nature of man.

It is necessary to learn to love oneself according to God, that is, by working for one's own eternal salvation and to love others precisely by helping them first of all to save themselves.

Says s. Augustine: "In order to have a well-ordered love, it is necessary to avoid the following: to love what is not to be loved, to love more what is to be loved less, to love equally what one should love or less or more, or to love less or more what is to be loved alike. The sinner, whoever he is, as a sinner is not to be loved; man, every man, insofar as he is a man, must be loved for the love of God; God must be loved for himself. "[275].

Therefore we are not to love the sinner as a sinner; we must love him as a man.

Man, every man, insofar as he is man, must be loved for the love of God ... and therefore love of neighbor will consist above all in bringing him to the love of God.

"Now God the teacher teaches two main commandments, that is, the love of God and the love of neighbor, in which man recognizes three objects that he must love: God, himself, his neighbor, and that in loving himself, no one errs loves God. It follows that he also provides for his neighbor so that he may love God because he is ordered to love him as himself, so that his wife, children, family members and other people can and wants to see to him in this way. , if you need it. " [276]

If loving ourselves according to God means committing ourselves to our salvation, loving our neighbor according to God will first of all work for his salvation.[277]

St. Augustine affirms: “Whoever therefore loves his neighbor rightly must obtain this from him: that he too loves God with all his heart, with all his soul and with all his mind. Loving him in this way as himself, he conveys all the love he has for himself and for the other to that love of God which does not tolerate that any stream, however small, is diverted outside himself so that from every dispersion of water would be reduced. "[278]

For the Fathers, spiritual charity obviously comes before bodily charity, because, according to the Scriptures and Tradition, the soul is immortal and the eternal salvation of soul and body depends on the soul.[279]

c, 1,1,1) The order of fraternal charity towards enemies.

The order of fraternal charity provides that we love our neighbor as ourselves, even our enemies. We must love them in an orderly way, as God's creatures, not as sinners, God does not ask us to love evil.[280]

St. Leo asks us to love them as God loves them who pours out his blessings on all, good and bad (St. Leo the Great, “Sermo 21”, PL., 54, 190); specifies the s. Doctor that we must not love vices but men, love them because they have our nature and can one day become children of God (St. Leo the Great, "Sermo 48", PL., 54, 299; cfr. "Sermo 12", PL., 54, 169).

St. Augustine taught this same doctrine by specifying that the doctrine of Christ also provides for punishments that are given in some cases to sinners without evil hatred ("Contra Adimantium"., Cp. 17, n. 1-5, PL., 42, 157 sqm; "Sermo 71", n ° 4, PL., 38, 446-447).

Christ came for sinners, to redeem them he suffered and died on the cross[281] [282] … And as he himself says, we must prolong the work of Christ guided by his Spirit in history, we must imitate him in his charity also with regard to sinners, enemies.

St. Augustine affirms that: perfect charity consists in loving your enemies in order to convert them and make them your brothers in Christ: “But what is the perfection of love? it is also to love the enemies and to love them so that they become brothers. … Love your enemies with the intention of making them brothers; love them until they enter your circle. Thus he loved the one who, hanging on the cross, said: Father, forgive them for they do not know what they are doing (Lk 23:34). Not that he said: Father, these have a long life; they who kill me have to live; but he said: he Forgives them because they don't know what they do[283].

It is sufficient, according to Origen, to fulfill the precept of the love of enemies not to return evil to the evil that is done to us, for injustice let us commit ourselves to offer a benefit[284].

St. Gregory of Nissa states in particular: "The enemy must be loved in not repaying evil with evil, but returning injustice with benefit."[285]

Says s. Maximus the Confessor that whoever possesses charity does not tire in following Christ but bears with a strong heart every travail, contempt and insult with a strong soul without thinking of evil. (S. Massimo, "De caritate", I, 29-30, PG., 90, 966)

St. Maximus the Confessor also affirmed that whoever does not imitate him in three things does not love Christ: 1 ° to deserve benefits for men; 2 ° support the ungrateful and detractors; 3 ° forgive those who have hurt us (cf. St. Maximus, “De caritate”, IV, 55, PG., 90, col. 1059).

Even with regard to enemies there is an order in charity because he is only our enemy than he who is our enemy and God's enemy (cf. Origen, "In Canticum Canticorum", lib. 3, PG., 13, deserves greater respect. 157 BC).

One of the models of charity towards enemies is Saint Stephen, says St. Augustine regarding St. Stephen: “Above all, therefore, brothers, for example of this Martyr, let us learn to love our enemies. The example was given to us by God the Father, who makes the sun rise on the good and the wicked. This was also said by the Son of God, following the Incarnation of him, with the mouth of his flesh which he assumed for the sake of his enemies. In fact, he who loves his enemies came into the world and found all his enemies, he found no friend. For his enemies he shed blood: with his blood, however, he converted the enemies. He blotted out the sins of his enemies with his blood: blotting out sins, he made them friends as enemies. "[286]

c, 1,2) The order of charity according to the affirmations of some Doctors of the Church and in some documents of the Magisterium.

In the wake of the Fathers of the Church, the saints and theologians continued to deepen the theme of the order of charity. The famous text by Pietro Lombardo "Libri IV Sententiarum" consecrates at least one distinction, n. 29 of the third book, on this theme. In it he affirms, starting from the texts of the Fathers, that we must first love God, then ourselves, then what is close to us and then what is below us; in particular, our neighbor is to be loved more than our body.[287] Then he examines whether all men are to be loved equally and explains, always starting from the sentences of the Fathers that first of all family members must be loved according to the flesh, father and mother, children, brothers and sisters. Therefore, the order of those who are to be loved is the following "ante omnia Deum, secundo nos ipsos, tertio parentes, inde filios et fratres, post domesticos, demum inimicos diligamus."[288] first God, then ourselves then the parents, then the children, then the relatives, then the others and then the enemies.

Love of neighbor goes in the sense of loving our neighbor as much as we love ourselves, that is, in a way similar to how we love ourselves and not as much as we love ourselves.

Pietro Lombardo says: ““ Ut tantum diligamus fratres, quantum nos ”, ita intelligi potest, id est ad tantum bonum diligamus fratres, ad quantum nos, ut tantum bonum eis optemus in aeternitate, quantum nobis, etsi non tanto affectu; vel ibi "quantum" similitudinis est, non quantitatis. " (Petri Lombardi "Libri IV Sententiarum" l. III d. XIX, Ad Claras Aquas 1916, T. II, p. 685)

St. Bonaventure in the Commentary on the Sentences of Pietro Lombardo when he addresses the comment on the question on the order of charity obviously specifies that God is to be loved over ourselves[289] then he specifies, also quoting other patristic quotations, that we must love ourselves more, as for the soul, than our neighbor: "Dicendum, quod secundumdinem caritatis amor salutis propriae praeponendus est amori salutis alienae"[290]. After our soul, as the scholion explains by interpreting the text of St. Bonaventure, the soul of the neighbor must be loved and then our body; among the neighbors, first of all the parents must be loved, then the children, then the other relatives, then the strangers[291].

St. Thomas speaks a lot of the order of charity, first of all in the "Commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard", in book III the whole question 29 is consecrated to the study of the order of charity. In his text on the virtues (De virtutibus,), s. Thomas consecrates the entire article IX of question II to the examination of the order of charity. He deals with this topic also in other works including the Sum Theological, in the latter, in II-II consecrates the entire question n. 26 to this theme, in it s. Thomas specifies first of all that God is to be loved more than our neighbor and more than ourselves, and that we must love ourselves more than our neighbor.

First of all, therefore, God is to be loved more than our neighbor (cf. IIª-IIae q. 26 a. 2 co.) And more than ourselves (cf. IIª-IIae q. 26 a. 3 co.). We must love ourselves more than our neighbor (IIª-IIae q. 26 a. 4, q. 64, a. 7) but we must love our neighbor more than our body. (IIª-IIae q. 26 a. 5 co.)

The moralist HB Merkelbach, following the thought of St. Thomas, in “Summa Theologiae Moralis” Desclée de Brouwer, Brugis - Belgica 1959, t.1, on p. 693 specifies that: “For the order of charity, God is simply to be loved above all things. Essential for charity is that we love God above all things… in an objective way… and also in an appreciative way so that we prefer to lose everything and suffer everything rather than losing God through grave sin. In fact, the infinite Good must be loved more than any creature ... the cause for which we love ourselves and our neighbor is God therefore God must love him more than ourselves and our neighbor. "(My translation)

Charity makes us love God above all and therefore above even our children, therefore it makes us radically oppose serious sin, it makes us hate it, and makes us make the necessary decisions not to commit it even if this should determine in some way a damage to the children and / or to us. St. Thomas, in this line, affirms that it is better to suffer any temporal evil than to deserve eternal punishment! "Et reddit causam bonum est tibi etc., quia melius est quodcumque malum temporal pati, quam mereri poenam aeternam." (“Super Mt.”, chap. 18 l. 1).

He who loves his neighbor truly loves, therefore, above all God above all and for this love of God he prefers to lose everything rather than sin. True charity leads us to prefer any punishment to guilt, that is, it also leads us to prefer the penalty of death to the guilt of sin (cf. "Quodlibet." I, 9) Obviously, true fraternal charity works so that the neighbor also lives in true charity putting God first and preferring to lose everything rather than sin.

St. Thomas then continues his reasoning on the order of charity, as mentioned, stating that, after God, we must love ourselves more than our neighbor (cf. IIª-IIae q. 26 a. 4 co.). . Thomas affirms that we must love our neighbor in an orderly way: “… debemus diligere ordinate: ut scilicet non diligamus eum supra Deum vel quantum Deum, sed juxta sicut teipsum debes diligere. Cant. II, 4: ordinavit in me caritatem. Hunc ordinim docuit dominus Matth. X, 37, dicens: qui amat patrem aut matrem plus quam me, non est me dignus; et qui amat filium aut filiam super me, non est me dignus. "(" Collationes in decem praeceptis ", a. 2) The neighbor is to be loved in an orderly way, that is, no more than God is to be loved or as much as God is to be loved but he is to be loved, according to biblical words, as ourselves. What does it mean that we must love our neighbor as ourselves? It does not mean that we must love our neighbor as much as we love ourselves! It means that we must love our neighbors in a similar way to the way we love ourselves, as the same self says. Thomas: the precept of fraternal love is formulated in a perfect way and must be understood not in the sense that one must love one's neighbor as much as he loves himself, that is, in the measure in which he loves himself, but it must be understood in the sense that everyone must love the neighbor in a way similar to how he loves himself: everyone must love his neighbor for God, as he must love himself for God, that is, with a holy love; each one must love his neighbor so as not to condescend his neighbor in evil, in sin, but only in good, love of neighbor must, in fact, be just; each one must love his neighbor not for his own advantage, but wanting the good of his neighbor as everyone wants the good of himself, love of neighbor, in fact, must be true (cf. II-II, q. 44 a. 7 co.)

St. Alphonsus de 'Liguori, Doctor of the Church, affirms regarding the order of charity: “Praeceptum caritatis Dei praecipit Deum super omnia amandum - Patet ex Scriptura. Ratio est, quia finis ultimus plus est diligendus, quam omnia media quae ad eum referuntur: non quidem intensive (etsi enim hoc etiam deceat, non tamen est in praecepto), sed appretiative, ita ut nullam creaturam pluris facias, quam Deum, velisque potius omnia perdendere, quam Deum offendere, et sic illi evil velle. "[292]

It is necessary to love God above all and this love must be understood not in an intensive sense but in an appreciative sense, that is, in the sense that one must be ready to lose everything rather than offend God with sin. Death is better than sin.

St. Alphonsus said, in this line, in the act of preparation for death “I affirm that I love you above all things, because you are an infinite good; and because I love you, I repent above all evil of all the offenses I have done to you, and I propose to die first than to offend you more. Please take my life away rather than allow me to lose you with another sin. "

Better to lose everything, including life, than to sin.

Going to examine more in depth the order of charity, the Neapolitan Doctor of the Church himself states: “Charity is defined as: Est virtus qua diligimus Deum per seipsum, ac nos et proximum propter Deum. So that the primary material object of charity (that is, what we must love) is God, whom we are bound to love above all, as our ultimate end. The secondary is ourselves, it is the neighbor that we must love as ourselves, because God commands us. The formal object of charity (that is, the reason why we must love God) is that he is infinite goodness, the source and aggregation of all perfections. as teaches s. Thomas: Est eadem virtus caritatis, qua quis diligit Deum, seipsum, et proximum; while we must not love ourselves, nor our neighbor if not for God. And therefore, since we love our neighbor to please God, we love God; thus by loving God we also love our neighbor, and everything that God wants us to love; and this is precisely how s. Thomas elsewhere in a nutshell: Qui habet caritatem Dei, eadem caritate diligit proximum. "[293]

St. Alphonsus affirms in this line, speaking of the order of charity: "14. Charity is ordered, so that we must prefer God and his grace to everything; at the meeting we are not obliged to prefer the good of our neighbor to our own, except when the good of our neighbor is of a greater order than ours. The order of goods is this: first the spiritual life, then the temporal, then the fame, and then the stuff. So that we are not obliged to prefer the life of our neighbor to our own, but rather we must prefer the spiritual health of our neighbor to our own life. Nevertheless, it is understood when the neighbor is in extreme necessity: and also in grave respect for bishops and parish priests, according to the common sentence (Lib. 2. n. 27.). And when the spiritual need of our neighbor is extreme, then we are bound to assist him, even though there is probable danger of falling into some sin (as long as the fall is not morally certain) while then we must rightly hope for divine help; so s. Tommaso, Suarez, Soto, Pal., Silvio, Tournely, Salmaticesi, etc. (Book 6. n. 453.). Of course, this is understood, provided that there is equal hope of helping, and that there is no one else to help: and more than otherwise, the neighbor will certainly be damned, since all this matters in the name of extreme necessity. But in times of plague, Laymann reasonably says, that the priests, lacking the others, are obliged to assist the dying, because in such a multitude it is morally certain, that there will be more sinners who will not be able to remedy their damnation through ignorance. of not knowing how to make the act of contrition (L. 2. n. 27. v. An autem.). "[294]

Thus, with some clarifications, the fundamental order of those towards whom we must exercise charity is confirmed: first of all God, then ourselves, our neighbor.

In the wake of the doctrine of the Doctors, the Fathers and on the basis of Scripture, always with regard to the order of charity, the Popes have made useful affirmations on the order of charity.

Here are some particularly significant ones.

Pius XI stated: "If this same selfishness (abusing the legitimate love of country and pushing the feeling of just nationalism to exaggeration, which the upright order of Christian charity not only does not disapprove, but sanctifies and vivifies with its own rules) relations between people and people, there is no excess that does not seem justified; and what between individuals would be judged reprehensible by all, is now considered as legitimate and worthy of praise if it is carried out in the name of such exaggerated nationalism. "[295]

Therefore the order of charity sanctifies and vivifies just nationalism, evidently because the order of charity commands us to love in a particular way those who belong to our homeland with respect to others.

John XXIII affirmed with regard to the homeland that: “it was always considered as it is, meritorious in the order of charity, to sacrifice ourselves for it even up to death”.[296]

Therefore it was considered meritorious in the order of charity, to sacrifice ourselves for it even up to death; the order of charity provides that we love our homeland in particular and that in some cases we are willing to give our physical life, not the spiritual one, in particular for the true spiritual good of that homeland.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church at n. 2239 states: “The love and service of homeland they derive from the duty of gratitude and from the order of charity. "

Pius XII stated: "Generous towards the poor outside the monastery, her charity triumphed and excelled within the cloistered walls, because it is in the order of charity itself and of a solid virtue and without illusions to lavish charitable care first of all in the interior of the community. "[297]

The order of fraternal charity leads us to lavish charitable care first of all on those closest to us.

Paul VI affirmed: “We regretted with Ourselves that we did not speak to you enough, that we did not testify more frequently, with better signs, to the sentiment that the Spirit of the Lord put and still puts in Our heart for you; a feeling that rises from the heart and drags with it how many other thoughts and feelings Our ministry makes arise in Our conscience: above all things, with everything, in the order of charity, it is you, Priests, with your Bishops and Our Brothers , who occupy the first place. "[298]

We saw in fact that Origen affirms that from God we must see how we love in an orderly way, in order to take an example; God hates nothing of what he created but does not love all men in the same way (cf. Origen “In Canticum Canticorum”, l. 3. PG., 13, 155ss).

In this light it must be considered that:

-according to the biblical principle according to which there are some more honorable members in the body and others less noble (1 Cor. 12), equally in the Body which is the Church the measure of love must be proportionate to the merits, in Christ, and to the honor of the people; s. In this line Paul affirms: “We ask you, brothers, to have regard for those who toil among you, who guide you in the Lord and admonish you; treat them with much respect and love, because of their work. Live in peace among yourselves. " (1 Thess. 5, 12-13). It is therefore necessary to love in a particular way holy persons and those who work for the salvation of souls. Charity, insofar as it is ordained, takes into account the merits of one's neighbor, his faith, the services rendered to the Church, his relationship with God.[299]

Paul VI also said “Effectively, the order of charity implies that everyone loves his neighbor - and everyone is a neighbor, according to the new commandment of Jesus -; that is, that each "serves" the others, is useful to the others. Others are the object, not the origin of the authority established for their service, not in their service. "[300]

The order of fraternal charity wants us to love our neighbor in the charity that comes from God, the origin of charity and of the authority willed by God for charity is God and not our neighbor; it must not be our neighbor who fixes the rule of our service of charity towards him, it is God who has established this rule; along this line, the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in n. 1822 "Charity is the theological virtue by which we love God above all things for ourselves, and our neighbor as ourselves for the love of God." We love our neighbor not for himself but for love of God and ultimately it is God who gives us the norm for true love of neighbor. God has given us this norm in particular with the commandments, so she Veritatis Splendor we read: "... the love of God necessarily implies respect for his commandments, even in the most serious circumstances, and the refusal to betray them, even with the intention to save your life. " (VS no. 91)

In the Catechism of the Catholic Church at n. 2197 states: “The fourth commandment opens the second table of the Law. Indicates the order of charity. ... "

As we saw above: Origen states that for the order of charity, first of all parents must be loved, then children, then other relatives and friends, it is also necessary to love enemies (cf. Origen, "Homilia II in Canticum Canticorum" n ° 8, PG., 13, 53-54)

Charity, as ordered, takes into account the merits of one's neighbor, his faith, the services rendered to the Church, his relationship with God (cf. Jacques Farges et Marcel Viller "La charité chez le péres" in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, and . Beauchesne, 1932-1995 ,, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 566) therefore Origen states: "Si autem filius malus est et domesticus bonus domesticus in caritate filii collocetur" (Origen, "Homilia II in Canticum Canticorum ”, n ° 7, PG., 13, 54) If the son is wicked and the servant is good, the servant is to be loved with the charity that belongs to the son.

The order of charity provides that after God we must love ourselves and in this line the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms in n. 2264 “Love for oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. It is therefore legitimate to enforce one's right to life. " The text goes on to explain that anyone who defends his life and is therefore forced to kill his attacker is not guilty of murder.

St. Thomas specifies that the defense is lawful if it is carried out in moderation and since every man is more obliged to provide for his own life than the life of others who does not commit a serious sin if he does not renounce legitimate defense to avoid the killing of others (cf. . II-II, q. 64, a. 7, c.).

As we said above, charity has a fundamental order that applies in particular to fraternal charity: first of all, do not do evil, then do good as much as you can, as Saint Augustine says: "Primum ut nulli noceat, deinde ut etiam prosit si potuerit "(" De civitate Dei ", Lib. 19, cp. 14, PL., 41, 643),[301] in this line s. John Paul II affirmed in this regard: “The commandments therefore represent the basic condition for love of neighbor; they are at the same time its verification. They are the first necessary stage on the path towards freedom, its beginning… ”(VS 13) The first freedom, states St. Augustine, consists in being free from crimes such as murder, adultery, fornication, theft, fraud, sacrilege and so on. When one does not commit these crimes, he begins to stand up in freedom, he is a beginner in the field of freedom, he is certainly not perfect in freedom (cf. "In lohannis Evangelium Tractatus," 41, 10: CCL 36, 363.) ... I emphasize: i commandments therefore represent the basic condition for the ordered love of neighbor; the first freedom consists in being free from crimes such as murder, adultery, fornication, homosexual practice, theft, fraud, sacrilege and so on ... the first level, the basic one, for an orderly love of neighbor consists in avoiding crimes such as murder, adultery, fornication, homosexual practice, theft, fraud, sacrilege and so on.

c, 2) The order of charity and the disorder that is taking place through Amoris Laetitia.

We will see in the next paragraphs even better the order of charity but from what we have said so far on fraternal charity and its order we can already understand that: he does not love according to charity in an orderly way his neighbor whoever commits serious sins for love of him; he who does not love his children in an orderly way according to charity who for love of them remain in grave sin; he who, for love of him, does not propose to live according to divine commandments, does not love his neighbor in an orderly way according to charity.

I add that, obviously, an ordered fraternal charity makes us work so that the holy and well-ordered love of God and neighbor is known and lived also by the neighbor himself so that he may love God and his neighbor in an orderly way.

Unfortunately, as we are seeing and we will see better and better in this book, Amoris Laetitia does not direct souls into true and ordered charity because of the errors of this exhortation for which it practically legitimizes real mortal sins, for which it practically allows us to to commit true serious sins in order to avoid (supposed) worse sins and damage to children and for which he grants sacramental absolution and therefore Eucharistic Communion to those who do not propose to live according to the Law of God and remain in a clear situation objectively and gravely sinful. Further, Amoris Laetitia goes so far as to declare, against what the Church, guided by true charity, has always taught, the death penalty is absolutely inadmissible ...

In this line, the "openings" mentioned above do not appear to be guided by true and orderly fraternal charity, and, in the line of Amoris Laetitia, they were made by Cardinal Clemente[302] by Msgr. Antonio Marto [303]

Equally, the "openings" that emerge from the affirmations of Cardinal Kasper do not appear to be guided by true and orderly fraternal charity[304]; the "openings" that emerge from the statements of Msgr. Elbs.[305]

Equally, the errors that emerge from the declarations of some supporters of Pope Francis do not appear to be guided by true and orderly fraternal charity.[306]

This means more profoundly that the "paradigm shift" that Pope Francis is carrying out with his followers opens the doors to a disordered charity, which actually becomes, in various cases, a false charity… which is not charity!

God intervene.

c, 3) The affirmations of Amoris Laetitia n.101 on the order of charity and their contrast with the affirmations of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, of St. Thomas etc.

As we have already highlighted above, the Pope said that Amoris Laetitia is a Thomist [307] as we have seen, and as we will see better and better, this papal statement does not correspond to reality, and here it seems to me important to note how Amoris Laetitia makes statements contrary to those of s. Thomas regarding the order of charity which, for the s. Doctor, it really predicts that after God we love ourselves. At no. 101 of Amoris Laetitia, in fact, it is stated “We have said many times that in order to love others, one must first love oneself. However, this hymn to love affirms that love "does not seek its own interest", or that it "does not seek what belongs to him". This expression is also used in another text: "Each one does not seek his own interest, but also that of others" (Phil 2,4: 14,5). Faced with such a clear affirmation of the Scriptures, one must avoid giving priority to love for oneself as if it were more noble than the gift of oneself to others. A certain priority of love for oneself can only be understood as a psychological condition, as those who are unable to love themselves find it difficult to love others: "Who is bad with himself, who will he be good with?" [...] No one is worse than he who harms himself "(Sir 6: XNUMX-XNUMX)."

This precedence, understood only as a psychological condition, of the love of ourselves with respect to the love of neighbor appears contrary to the teaching of self. Thomas but more generally to sound Catholic doctrine, in fact for this doctrine in true charity there is a real precedence of love for ourselves over love of neighbor: true charity leads us to love first of all ourselves after God. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, also reporting a text by St. Thomas states in n. 2264 the lawfulness of the defense of one's life and the killing of those who attack us. The text of s. Thomas, which the Catechism reports, affirms that the defense is lawful if it is carried out in moderation and since every man is obliged more to provide for his own life than for the life of others; he does not commit a sin who does not renounce legitimate defense to avoid the killing of others (cf. II-II, q. 64, a. 7, c.).

In this affirmation we also find fixed the Thomist doctrine that after God we must love ourselves; s. Thomas, as we are seeing and as we will see in the following pages, is very clear in affirming this truth.[308]

I then point out that even for s. Bonaventure, in the Commentary on the Sentences, as we also saw, the order of charity is such that, after God, we must love ourselves and therefore our neighbor.[309]; the first mercy must be exercised towards oneself, explains St. Bonaventure: “Ad illum quod obiicitur quod caritas est amor liberalis; dicendum, quod quamvis liberalitas quantum ad suam completionem respiciat alterum, tamen quantum ad suum initium prius respicit ipsum qui liberalitatem impendit, sicut et misericordia. de qua dictum est quod primo debet homo sui ipsius misereri. "[310]

The curators of the Opera Omnia di s. Bonaventura, ed. Quaracchi specify that the affirmations of s. Bonaventure for whom it is necessary to love after God ourselves and then our neighbor if referring to our own soul are common doctrine; therefore it is the common doctrine of the Church that, after God, we must love our soul. [311]

May God enlighten us better and better and give us a truly ordered charity.

c, 4) In-depth study of the affirmations of St. Thomas about the order of fraternal charity.

Says s. Thomas, as seen,: “… a man is more obliged to provide for his own life than for the life of others” (II-II, q. 64, a. 7)…. that is, man is obliged to love himself before his neighbor… and in fact in the Summa Theologica, in another question, s. Thomas specifies that God is to be loved more than our neighbor and more than ourselves, and we must love ourselves more than our neighbor. Let's see better.

First of all, explains s. Thomas, God is to be loved more than his neighbor: “Et ideo principaliter et maxime Deus est ex caritate diligendus, ipse enim diligitur sicut beatitudinis causa; proximus autem sicut beatitudinem simul nobiscum ab eo participans. "(IIª-IIae q. 26 a. 2 co.)

God is to be loved mainly and above all for charity, obviously above the neighbor…. therefore we cannot go against the divine law not even to help others! “… The friendship of charity is founded on the participation of beatitude, which is found essentially in God as in his principle, from which it radiates in all those who are capable of it. Therefore charity obliges us to love God mainly and supremely: since he is to be loved as the cause of beatitude, while our neighbor is to be loved as sharing with us in his beatitude. "[312]. St. Thomas continues by explaining that God is to be loved more than ourselves “Et ideo ex caritate magis debet homo diligere Deum, qui est bonum commune omnium, quam seipsum, quia beatitudo est in Deo sicut in communi et fontali omnium principle qui beatitudinem participare possunt. " (IIª-IIae q. 26 a. 3 co.) Man, for charity, must love God, who is the common good of all, more than himself because beatitude is in God as the common and primary principle of all those who can participate in beatitude. ... therefore man must not go against the Law of God even for his own advantage ...

St. Thomas then continues his reasoning by affirming that we must love ourselves more than our neighbor (IIª-IIae q. 26 a. 4). This teaching is found in various works of the s. Doctor. Let's start by looking at what he had written a few years before the drafting of the Theological Sum, again on this point, the same saint in the Commentary on the Sentences.

In Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 29 q. 1 a. 5, s. Thomas specifies that we must love ourselves more than our neighbor and distinguishes in us the spiritual goods and the corporal goods, an internal and an external nature, and adds that we must love ourselves more as regards the internal nature than the external one and that we must want for ourselves first of all the goods pertaining to the inner nature as well as to the outer one, but all the works of virtue are good for each according to the inner nature and among them are the works that are done towards the neighbor for his good and therefore:

- spiritual goods, which pertain more directly to virtue, must always be used and desired more for us than for others and the same is true for the evils that must be avoided;

-The external goods, which indirectly pertain to virtue, are to be used more for friends than for us, according to the fact that in this consists the good of virtue, which is our highest good.

In fact, it says s. Thomas in the sed contra of one of his articles that the more one seeks the salvation of the other, s. Thomas, the more he makes his friend not sin but man must avoid his own sin rather than that of others, therefore he must love his life more than that of others; man must initiate mercy from himself and therefore he must first love himself; therefore it is evident that man must love himself more than his neighbor: “quantum quis amat salutem alicujus, tanto vitat peccatum ejus. Sed homo magis debet vitare peccatum suum quam peccatum alterius. Ergo magis must love vitam suam quam salutem alterius. "(Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 29 q. 1 a. 5, sed contra)

This text is fully accepted by the Doctor himself in the body of the article in which he states: “Omnia autem opera virtutis sunt sibi bona secundum interiorem naturam, inter quae etiam sunt illa quae quis ad amicum operatur; et ideo plura bona exteriora sunt impendenda amicis quam nobis ipsis, inquantum consistit in hoc bonum virtutis, quod est nostrum maximum bonum; sed de bonis spiritualibus semper plus nobis quam amicis impendere debemus et velle, et similiter etiam de malis vitandis. "(Super Sent., lib. 3 d. 29 q. 1 a. 5 in c.)

Love makes the beloved more important than the lover but man loves himself and others and the love for which we love ourselves, as intrinsic to us, can be greater than the love we carry for a other, which is external to us; the greater the affection placed in himself by the lover he loves, compared to the affection he brings to the other, who is external to him, who is also loved: "... in amore amatum, ut amatum, potius est quam amans ut amans. Sed quia, ut amans est etiam amatum a seipso; ideo potius potest esse in amore, inquantum est amatum, quam amatum extrinsecum, et magis collocatur in ipso affectus amantis quam in exterior amato. "(Super Sent., lib. 3 d. 29 q. 1 a. 5 ad 1.) Adds s. Thomas that whoever gives his life for the other does not love his neighbor more than himself but loves in himself more the good of virtue than the good of the body (cf. Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 29 q. 1 a . 5 ad 3).

St. Bonaventure, Doctor of the Church, lived practically in his own period and, like St. Thomas, commentator of the famous text by Pietro Lombardo "Libri IV Sententiarum", says the same, as seen, commenting on the same question: "Dicendum, quod secundumordinum caritatis amor salutis propriae praeponendus est amori salutis alienae" [313]In the q. 4 of the De Virtutibus in art. 9 s. Thomas explains: “Unde sic inclinari oportet affectum hominis per caritatem, ut primo et principaliter aliquis diligat Deum; second autem seipsum; tertio proximum: et inter proximos, magis illos qui sunt magis contiuncti, et magis nati sunt coadiuvare. Qui autem impediunt, in quantum huiusmodi, sunt odiendi, quicumque sunt; unde dominus dicit, Luc., XIV, 26: si quis venit ad me, et non odit patrem suum di lui et matrem (…) non potest esse meus discipulus. Last autem diligendum est corpus nostrum. “We must orient charity first of all towards God, then towards ourselves and then towards others and among others it is necessary to orient this virtue above all towards those who are closest to us. In the commentary on the second letter to Timothy s. Thomas states: “Dicendum est quod in homine duo sunt, scilicet natura rationalis et corporalis. Quantum ad intellectualem seu rationalem, quae interior homo appellatur, ut dicitur II Cor. IV, 16, homo debet plus se diligere quam omnes alios, quia stultus esset qui vellet peccare ut alios a peccatis retrahat; sed quantum ad exteriorm hominem, he laudable est ut alios plus diligat quam se. ”(Super II Tim., Chap. 3 l. 1) Therefore it is necessary to love oneself more than others as regards the intellectual nature but it is commendable that we love others more than us as regards the body.

As s. Thomas for charity we must first love God, then ourselves, then our neighbor and therefore we must not suffer the evil of sin to free our neighbor from sin; as already said we can never sin, not even to save our neighbor from sin, let alone, I add, we can sin to save our neighbor from other evils. God is loved as the first principle of good on which the love of charity is founded; man with charity loves himself inasmuch as he participates in this good, while his neighbor is loved according to the reason of society, that is, of sharing in the same good, now sharing or association is a reason for love as it constitutes a certain union in order to God; just as unity is more than union, so the fact of participating personally in the divine good is a reason for love that is superior to the fact of having another person associated with oneself in this participation therefore man must love himself with the charity more than one's neighbor and we have a sign of it in the fact that one must never sin, which is opposed to participation in beatitude, in order to free one's neighbor from sin (cf. IIª-IIae q. 26 a.4 co.). St. Thomas further specifies his thought by stating that we must love our neighbor more than our body: “Respondeo dicendum quod illud magis est ex caritate diligendum quod habet pleniorem rationem diligibilis ex caritate, ut dictum est. Consociatio autem in plena participatione beatitudinis, quae est ratio diligendi proximum, est major ratio diligendi quam participatio beatitudinis per redundantiam, quae est ratio diligendi proprium corpus. Et ideo proximum, quantum ad salutem animae, magis debemus diligere quam proprium corpus. " (IIª-IIae q. 26 a. 5 co.) Charity requires us to love more what according to charity is more lovable, therefore, with respect to the salvation of the soul, we must love our neighbor more than our body. In the commentary on the second letter to Timothy s. Thomas had practically said the same thing: we must love ourselves more than others as regards the intellectual nature but we must love others more than ourselves as regards the body. (Super II Tim., Chap. 3 l. 1)

We said earlier that the commandment that we must love our neighbor as ourselves does not mean that we must love our neighbor as much as we love ourselves or to the same extent, yes. In fact, Thomas affirms that we must love our neighbor in a way similar to the way we love ourselves: with a love that is holy, just and true (cf. II-II, q. 44 a. 7 co.). To love one's neighbor righteously as oneself means, explains s. Thomas in another text, desire for one's neighbor goods in the just and holy order according to which everyone must desire them for himself, and for this order everyone must first desire spiritual goods, then corporal ones and those goods that consist of external things: “Sic igitur rectitudo circa dilectionem proximi instituitur, cum praecipitur alicui quod proximum diligat sicut se ipsum; ut scilicet eo order bona proximis optet quo sibi optare debet: praecipue quidem spiritualia bona, deinde bona corporis, et quae in exterioribus rebus consistunt. " (De perfectione, chap. 13 co .; cf. II-II q. 152 a. 2)

I emphasize that we must love ourselves after God and that we must not love our neighbor more than ourselves, nor as much as we love ourselves but we must love our neighbor in a similar way, analogous to how we love ourselves by desiring the goods in our neighbor. just and holy order according to which everyone must desire them for himself.

The order of charity sets a real priority for which we must love, after God, ourselves and then our neighbor. Our first "neighbor" to love is ourselves and in particular the first neighbor to love is our soul!

In the Sum Theological s. Thomas reaffirms his thoughts on this subject where he affirms: “Ad secundum dicendum quod ordo quatuor diligendorum ex caritate in sacra Scriptura exprimitur. ”(IIª-IIae q. 44 a. 8 ad 2) Therefore the order of charity is indicated in the Bible and for this order, s. Thomas, we must love ourselves more than our neighbor, but we must love the soul of our neighbor more than our body, and among our neighbors we must love the closest ones more. This real priority of love for oneself over love for our neighbor is established by God himself (cf. IIª-IIae q. 44 a. 8 ad 2).

More precisely, according to St. Thomas the order of charity is commanded by God and therefore sins those who do not act according to this order: "Ex hoc ergo ipso quod alterum quod est minus diligendum, aequiparo in dilectione ei quod diligendum est magis, non totum dilectionis quod debeo, impendo ei quod magis diligendum est; et similiter etiam patet in aliis. Unde caritatis ordo est in praecepto; et peccat qui praepostere agit, ut in littera dicitur. "(Super Sent., lib. 3 p. 29 q. 1 BC Reply to Objection 1.) As can be seen, St. Thomas confirms the sed contra affirmation in the answer he gives: the order of charity is commanded by God! Also in the Supreme Theological s. Thomas offers us an important clarification regarding the love of neighbor and of ourselves: “Respondeo dicendum quod necessarium dupliciter dicitur. One way, sine quo aliquid esse non potest. And of such necessary omnino eleemosyna dari non debet, puta si aliquis in articulo necessitatis constitutus haberet solum unde posset sustentari, et filii sui vel alii ad eum pertinentes; de hoc enim necessary eleemosynam dare est sibi et suis vitam subtrahere. Sed hoc I say nisi forte talis casus immineret ubi, subtrahendo sibi, daret alicui magnae personae, per quam Ecclesia vel respublica sustentaretur, quia pro talis personae liberatione seipsum et suos laudabiliter periculo mortis exponeret, cum bonum commune sit proprio praeferendum ". (IIª-IIae q. 32 BC 6 co.) Therefore normally the love of ourselves must precede the love of neighbor and therefore we cannot take away what is essential to live in order to give it to others but in case there was a situation of necessity one could take away from oneself and his family what is necessary to give it to an important person who is supportive of the Church or the homeland: since for the salvation of such a person it would be praiseworthy for one to expose himself and his family to the danger of death, the common good having to be preferred for one's own good. This statement must not upset us. S. Thomas clarifies this truth very precisely when he states “Ad tertium dicendum quod cuilibet homini imminet cura proprii corporis, non autem imminet cuilibet homini cura de salute proximi, nisi forte in casu. Et ideo non est de necessitye caritatis quod homo propum corpus exponat pro salute proximi, nisi in casu quod tenetur eius saluti providere. Sed quod aliquis sponte ad hoc se offerat, pertinet ad perfectionem caritatis. "(IIª-IIae q. 26 BC Reply to Objection 5) It is not necessary for charity that man expose his body for the salvation of his neighbor, except in the case in which he is obliged to provide for the salvation of that neighbor, but if someone voluntarily offers his body for the sake of salvation of one's neighbor without being obliged to do so, this pertains to the perfection of charity. S. Thomas affirms on the other hand that man has various types of ties and that for such ties as they are for the homeland or even deeper ones for the Church and for them it is virtuous to give one's life (cf. IIª-IIae q. 31 BC Reply to Objection 3) What we have just seen falls fundamentally on the principle that man must love his neighbor more than his own body (cf. IIª-IIae q. 26 BC 5 co.) But man must not suffer damage in spiritual things for the spiritual or temporal good of his neighbor and the community is obviously included in this neighbor: "Ad secundum dicendum quod detrimenta corporalia debet homo sustinere propter amicum, et in hoc ipso seipsum magis diligit secundum spiritualem mentem, quia hoc pertinet ad perfectionem virtutis, quae est bonum mentis. Sed in spiritualibus non debet homo pati detrimentum peccando ut proximum liberet a peccadillo, sicut dictum est. "(IIª-IIae q. 26 BC

In spiritual things, man must not suffer detriment by sinning to free his neighbor from sin. And already above we saw that, according to St. Thomas: as for his spiritual nature, man must love himself more than others (cf. Super II Tim. Chap. 3 l. 1).

c, 5) Other famous moralists and more recent Doctors including s. Alfonso M. de Liguori fully welcome the teaching of St. Thomas, which is the common doctrine of the Church. Some passages of the Magisterium confirm this.

The luminous teachings of St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure on the order of charity are welcomed by the great doctors and by the theologians and moralists who follow them.

The real precedence of love for ourselves over love for neighbor emerges in fact in this text of St. Catherine in which it is stated that true charity does not make us sin even to tear the whole world from hell!

"And this love gives discretion without end and without way towards me: but that I know the highest and eternal truth, it does not put law or end to the love with which he loves me, but places it well with an orderly way and charity towards his neighbor. The light of discretion, which comes out of charity as told you, gives to the neighbor ordered love, that is, with ordered charity, which does not harm itself to make use of the neighbor. That if only one sin were to make a living out of the whole world of hell or to use a great virtue, it would not be charity ordered with discretion, it would also be indiscreet, because it is not permitted to make a great virtue or benefit to one's neighbor through sin. … It would not be a fitting thing that to save the creatures, who are finished and created by me, I was offended who know 'Infinite good: only that fault would be more serious, and great, than it would not be the fruit that it would do for that fault. Yes, what guilt of sin you must not do in any way: true charity is known to her because she carries with her the light of holy discretion. "[314]

As said s. Thomas true charity leads us to love, after God, first of all ourselves and therefore our neighbor, true charity does not lead us to love our neighbor more than ourselves and therefore does not lead us to sin in order to do good to our neighbor; s. Catherine, enlightened by God in a special way, specifies, in the text just seen, that true charity is ordered and does not make us commit sin even to avoid the most terrible damage to our neighbor, it does not make us sin even if we could have sinned with such a sin. get the damned out of hell….

In his commentary on the Theological Sum of St. Thomas which appears in the Leonine edition, and in particular in the commentary on II-II q. 26 a. 4 and 5, Cardinal Cajetan fully accepts the doctrine of the Angelic Doctor that after God one must love one's soul; The Cardinal also specifies that man is not required to expose his own body to danger for the spiritual health of others except in case of necessity, out of this case he is not required but can do it for a greater charity, as they do commendably certain religious in times of epidemics; Cajetan adds that each is responsible for the care of his own body, the salvation of the other is only in particular circumstances[315], in fact, as the Cardinal himself points out, in the line of s. Thomas, in the commentary on II-II q. 64 a. 7 man is required to provide more for himself than for others: "plus tenetur homo vitae suae providere quam vitae alienae."[316]

Even the great Doctor of the Church St. Alfonso M. de 'Liguori follows the line of s. Thomas, by s. Bonventura and del Gaetano, in fact clearly says in his famous "Theologia Moralis"

. Order caritatis, quisque tenetur post Deum diligere:

1st seipsum, secundum bona spiritualia;

2 ° proximum, quoad eadem bona;

3rd seipsum, quoad bona corporalia;

4 ° proximum, quoad eadem;

5 ° denique seipsum, et deinde proximum, quoad bona externa. "[317]

And the same Doctor on the same page of the same book states: "Nullius boni consequendi cause licet peccare, etiam venialiter: quia talis vellet sibi malum Spiritual", that is, it is not lawful to sin even venially to achieve any good because such a person would want a spiritual evil, which is contrary to the order of charity.

Even the most recent famous moralists clearly reaffirm the doctrine expounded by s. Thomas and from s. Bonaventure, see in particular what the texts of HB Merkelbach affirm in this regard[318] Prummer (see Prummer "Theologiae Moralis Manual", Herder 1961, vol. I, p. 418 ss) Aertnys - Damen (see "Theologia Moralis .." Marietti, 1957, vol. I p. 337ss)

What s says. Thomas and with him St. Bonaventure and the common doctrine that man must first love himself and then others, and therefore he cannot sin to free others from sin (IIª-IIae q. 26 a. 4 ad 2) also emerges from important magisterial texts .

In the VS we read: “Negative moral precepts, that is, those which prohibit certain concrete acts or behaviors as intrinsically bad, do not admit any legitimate exception; they leave no morally acceptable room for the "creativity" of some contrary determination. Once the moral species of an action prohibited by a universal rule has been concretely recognized, the only morally good act is to obey the moral law and to refrain from the action it forbids "(VS n. 67 cf. ibidem n. 13, 52, 99, 102)

In an important document published in the Osservatore Romano we read "The Christian moral tradition has ... constantly and clearly affirmed that, among the negative ones, the norms that prohibit intrinsically disordered acts do not admit exceptions ..."

(Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris consortio, n. 32). "[319]

For no reason intrinsically evil acts can be committed, not even to help others not to sin, because we must first love our soul and then that of our neighbor.

I add that true fraternal charity, moreover, leads us to ensure that our neighbors have a truly ordered charity and therefore leads us to ensure that they love God first and therefore themselves and then others. Charity leads us to ensure that our neighbors are never willing to sin for the good of ourselves or of others ...

Through Amoris Laetitia n. 101 and more generally through the errors that this document contains and with which it practically legitimizes very serious sins and therefore allows the administration of the Sacraments to those who commit such sins and through the errors of various Bishops and priests who take their cue from it is therefore presented a disordered charity and in some cases a false house, not conforming to sound doctrine and in particular to the doctrine of St. Thomas, the teaching of this exhortation leads Christians not only to live outside the Truth, but leads them to work so that their neighbors too have a distorted charity that does not conform to sound doctrine, Tradition and the Bible. God intervene quickly and very strongly.

c, 6) The right interpretation of the Pauline texts which seem to affirm that man must love others more than himself.

In this line it must obviously be stated that per s. Thomas and s. Bonaventure the biblical texts, Pauline, cited in Amoris Laetitia n.101 and for which "Each does not seek his own interest, but also that of others" (Phil 2,4) and for which charity "does not seek his own interest" (1 Cor. 13) do not mean that charity leads us to love others more than ourselves

St. Bonaventure states in particular that the text of 1 Cor. 13 wants to condemn the behavior of those who seek their interest by excluding the common interest, which is a vice; seeks his interest, in this line, those who sin out of lust (S. Bonaventure "In III Sententiarum" q. 29 a.1 q. 3 ad 1m) St. Thomas says practically the same in his commentary on the first letter to Corinthians chap. 13 and adds that charity does not seek its own interest in the sense that it seeks more the salvation of souls than temporal things (cf. Super I Cor. [Reportatio vulgata], chap. 13 l. 2) In the commentary on the letter to the Philippians s. Thomas specifies that the words that: "Each one does not seek his own interest, but also that of others" (Phil 2,4: 2) are an invitation to fraternal charity which excludes selfishness but not ordered charity towards ourselves for which we must love ourselves more than our neighbor. (Super Philip., Ch. 1 l. XNUMX) The line followed by s. Thomas and from s. Bonaventure regarding the order of charity is a common line, as we are seeing, therefore the straight and traditional interpretation of the Pauline passages quoted by Amoris Laetitia does not go in the sense of affirming that charity leads us to love our neighbor more than ourselves but in the sense of condemning the selfishness that leads us to do what we like and not what God wants, which is our true good and which fits neatly into the true good of the community. The Pauline texts in question do not condemn the ordered charity which leads people to love themselves after God but condemn disordered charity, the false charity which does not put God in the first place or which puts material goods above spiritual goods.

Fr. Marco Sales when in his commentary on the first letter to the Corinthians he examines the text of 1 Cor. 13 for which charity does not seek its own interest, he explains that charity does not seek its own interest by neglecting the interests of others.[320]

The same author, when examining the text of Philippians for which charity does not seek its own interest, explains, in a note, that: "The love of one's own convenience combined with the contempt of others is the source of divisions and discords, and therefore the 'Apostle, after having recommended mutual esteem in the previous verse, now recommends that no one prefers his own advantage to common utility " [321]

Therefore these texts do not affirm that charity leads us to love others more than ourselves but they affirm that charity does not lead us to love ourselves in a disorderly manner; charity keeps us away from selfishness and a false love of ourselves which does not make us subject to the word of God and does not make us follow the example of Christ; charity keeps us away from selfishness and from a false love of ourselves that makes us seek our comforts and not the true good of ourselves and of others; charity keeps us away from selfishness and a false love of ourselves that makes us seek material goods and not the true spiritual good of ourselves and of others.

The importance of the order of charity is also confirmed by the fact that if it also lacks our commitment to the salvation of others, it is weak and ineffective. In fact, disorder implies ineffectiveness. The great saints thought first of all of their conversion and sanctification and only after having truly achieved it did they help others to save themselves with great effectiveness.

St. Ammonius, an ascetic of the first centuries, affirmed in this regard that the great saints worked justice among men after having withdrawn into a great silence, having been converted and having received the divine virtues by which God dwelt in them. Only when they had such virtues and God lived in them, God himself sent them, to lead men to God and heal their infirmities. Only then were they sent, when all their infirmities had been healed; to be doctors of others they must have been doctors first of all for themselves; to perfect others they had to have come to perfection themselves.[322]

These great saints worked with great effectiveness among men and their apostolate was very fruitful and greatly blessed by God precisely because it was deeply ordained according to God.

Obviously, the moral disorders that Amoris Laetitia spreads in various ways do not bear good fruit for the Church. God intervene quickly!

8) Concluding clarifications of chap. V: the Pope's affirmations are betrayal and not an evolution of sound doctrine.

Taking up what we saw above, in the concluding clarifications of the third chapter and what we saw in the first two chapters and avoiding to propose again all the doctrinal texts of the Tradition that are the basis of our judgment and that you can see in these clarifications, I must affirm that the statements of the Pope , in the moral sphere, in this chapter there does not appear a development of sound doctrine but a change in it, in fact, they do not appear in the sense of the continuity of principles, they do not develop as a logical consequence and do not realize a preservative influence of the past, they are simply a betrayal of sound doctrine ... they betray fundamental doctrines, especially in the moral sphere, doctrines clearly connected to Holy Scripture and reaffirmed by Tradition ...

Although the Pope and some of his collaborators try to pass his work as an evolution and as a pure Thomist doctrine, it is a radical change, a true perversion of sound doctrine and is also in clear opposition to the doctrine of the s. Doctor of Aquino, the same Prelates close to the Pope speak of it, indicating it as a "paradigm shift", with it the sound doctrine is cleverly put aside and the doors are opened to invalid confessions, serious sins, sacrileges, etc.!

With this "paradigm shift", in particular, as seen in this chapter, the Pope makes the revealed Law incredibly disappear, on an essential point of morality, and puts aside the doctrine according to which the negative norms of divine law are always obligatory. and in every circumstance, all this is connected to the errors seen in the fourth chapter for which a Christian moral conscience can believe with sincerity and honesty and discover with a certain moral certainty that God allows it to do what he himself absolutely forbids, always and without exceptions, and also connects to the errors indicated in chapter III. In this line, the door also opens to a false idea of ​​charity, as well as to serious sins, sacrileges, etc. Also with regard to such errors, the words of prof. Seifert in the German theological magazine AEMAET, and for which the n ° 303 of Amoris Laetitia is "a theological atomic bomb that threatens to tear down the entire moral edifice of the 10 commandments and of Catholic moral teaching". (http://www.aemaet.de/index.php/aemaet/article/view/44/pdf_1; Josef Seifert: “Does pure logic threaten to destroy the entire moral doctrine of the Church?” Roman Correspondence, 2017 https: //www.corrispondenzaromana.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Testo-Seifert-italiano.pdf?it). The professor. Meiattini added, in Seifert's line: "Here Seifert is right: if the meaning of that expression in AL is this, and I don't see what else it could be, then the whole Christian morality collapses." (L. Scrosati, "Mitigating out of the game, marriage is not a moral", La Bussola Quotidiana, 11.3.2018 http://www.lanuovabq.it/it/attenuanti-in-fuori-gioco-il-matrimonio- is-not-a-moral)

The Pope, as seen in this chapter, uses and quotes s. Thomas to spread what is contrary to the full doctrine of the s. Doctor.

May the glorious Mother of God intercede for us, who annihilates heretical doctrines, crushes the power of error and unmasks the snare of idols (cf. Hymn Akathistos, vv. 111-112; ed. GG Meersseman, Der Hymnos Akathistos im Abendland, vol. I, Universitatsverlag, Freiburg Schw. 1958, p. 114)

Footnotes

[1]La Civiltà Cattolica, “A private meeting of the Pope with some Colombian Jesuits” La Civiltà Cattolica year 2017, notebook 4015, volume IV pag. 3 - 10, 7 October 2017 https://it.aleteia.org/2017/09/29/amoris-laetitia-papa-francesco-risponde-dubia-morale-tomista/2/ http://www.laciviltacattolica.it / article / grace-is-not-an-ideology /

[2]John Paul II, Encyclical Letter “Dominum et Vivificantem”, 18.5.1986, n. 10, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/it/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_18051986_dominum-et-vivificantem.html

[3]See St. Athanasius of Alexandria, “De Incarnatione”, 54, 3: SC 199, 458 (PG 25, 192); St. Thomas Aquinas, “Officium de festo corporis Christi”, Ad Matutinas, In the first Nocturno, Lectio 1; Saint Irenaeus of Lyons, Adversus haereses, 3, 19, 1: SC 211, 374 (PG 7, 939)

[4]See Kaufmann Kohler "Love" in Jewish Encyclopedia, 1901-1906, New York and London https://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10127-love

[5]See Penna, Romano. "Love boundless" (Italian Edition) (positions in Kindle 657-679). San Paolo Editions. 2019 Edition of the Kindle

[6]Pen, Roman. "Love boundless" (Italian Edition) (positions in Kindle 561-562). San Paolo Editions. Kindle Edition 2019

[7]Pen, Roman. "Love boundless" (Italian Edition) (positions in Kindle 578-580). San Paolo Editions. 2019 Edition of the Kindle

[8]Cf. International Theological Commission “The Bible and morals. The biblical roots of Christian action ”11.5.2008 n. 2.1.3, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20080511_bibbia-e-morale_it.html

[9]Cf. International Theological Commission “The Bible and morals. The biblical roots of Christian action ”11.5.2008 n. 2.2.1, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20080511_bibbia-e-morale_it.html

[10]Pen, Roman. "Love boundless" (Italian Edition) (positions in Kindle 583-584). San Paolo Edizioni 2019. Edition of the Kindle

[11]Cf. International Theological Commission “The Bible and morals. The biblical roots of Christian action ”11.5.2008, n. 2.2.2, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20080511_bibbia-e-morale_it.html

[12]Cf. International Theological Commission “The Bible and morals. The biblical roots of Christian action ”11.5.2008 n. 2.2.3, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20080511_bibbia-e-morale_it.html

[13]Pen, Roman. "Love boundless" (Italian Edition) (positions in Kindle 3880-3881). San Paolo Edizioni 2019. Edition of the Kindle

[14]cf, Roman. Boundless Love (Italian Edition) (positions in Kindle 585-588). San Paolo Editions. 2019 Edition of the Kindle

[15]Pen, Roman. "Love boundless" (Italian Edition) (positions in Kindle 490-494). San Paolo Editions. 2019 Edition of the Kindle.

[16]See F. Zorell "Lexicon Hebraicum Veteris Testamenti", Pontifical Biblical Institute Rome 1989 p.16-17

[17]Pen, Roman. Boundless Love (Italian Edition) (positions in Kindle 502-503). San Paolo Editions. 2019 Edition of the Kindle.

[18]John Paul II "Dives in Misericordia", 30.11.1980/52/30111980 note XNUMX, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_XNUMX_dives-in -misericordia.html

[19]John Paul II "Dives in Misericordia", 30.11.1980/52/30111980 note XNUMX, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_XNUMX_dives-in -misericordia.html

[20]See John Paul II "Dives in Misericordia", 30.11.1980/52/30111980 note XNUMX, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_XNUMX_dives -in-mercy.html

[21]See F. Zorell “Lexicon Graecum Novi Testamenti” Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome 1990 coll. 5-8 and 1402-3

[22]See F. Zorell “Lexicon Graecum Novi Testamenti”, Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome 1990, coll. 5-8

[23]See F. Zorell “Lexicon Graecum Novi Testamenti”, Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome 1990, coll. 5-6

[24]See F. Zorell “Lexicon Graecum Novi Testamenti”, Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome 1990, coll. 5-8

[25]See F. Zorell “Lexicon Graecum Novi Testamenti”, Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome 1990, col. 1402-3, word phileo

[26]See A. Pen "Love in the Bible" Paideia, Brescia 1972 p. 22

[27]See F. Zorell “Lexicon Graecum Novi Testamenti”, Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome 1990, col. 903s

[28]See F. Zorell “Lexicon Graecum Novi Testamenti”, Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome 1990, col. 1225s

[29]See Ferdinand Prat “Charite” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995, Tome 2 - Columns 508s

[30]See Ferdinand Prat “Charite” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995, Tome 2 - Columns 509

[31]See Ferdinand Prat “Charite” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995, Tome 2 - Columns 519s

[32]See St. Thomas Aquinas "Sum against the Gentiles", and UTET, 2013, ebook, l.1 c. ninety two.

[33]See St. Thomas Aquinas "Sum against the Gentiles", and UTET, 2013, ebook, l.1 c. ninety two.

[34]S. Tommaso d 'Aquino "Sum against the Gentiles", and UTET, 2013, ebook, book III c. 149

[35]S. Agostino “The Trinity” l. VI, 5,7 translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/trinita/index2.htm

[36]S. Agostino “The Trinity” l. XV, 17,31 translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova Sant'Agostino - La Trinità publishing house online (www.augustinus.it .it)

[37]S. Tommaso d 'Aquino "Sum against the Gentiles", and UTET, 2013, ebook, book IV c. 21

[38]Leo XIII, “Divinum illud Munus” 9.5.1897 www.vatican.va https://www.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_09051897_divinum-illud-munus.html

[39]Leo XIII, “Divinum illud Munus” 9.5.1897 n.9 www.vatican.va https://www.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_09051897_divinum-illud-munus.html

[40]John Paul II, Encyclical Letter “Dominum et Vivificantem”, 18.5.1986, n. 10, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/it/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_18051986_dominum-et-vivificantem.html

[41]Brochure 57, “On the feast of the Body of the Lord”, lect. 1-4 "www.chiesacattolica.it, https://www.chiesacattolica.it/la-liturgia-delle-ore/?data=20210606&ora= ufficio-delle-letture&data-liturgia=20210606

[42]. Tommaso d 'Aquino "The perfection of the spiritual life" in "Compendium of theology and other writings" Unione Tipografico-Editrice Torinese, First edition eBook: March 2013, n. 5 and 6 p. 486

[43]Cf Council of Constantinople III (year 681), Sess. 18a, Definitio de duabus in Christo voluntatibus et operationibus: DS 556-559.

[44]Council of Constantinople III, Sess. 18A, in Heinrich Denzinger “Enchiridion symbolorum, definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei et morum” edited by P. Hünermann, Edizioni Dehoniane Bologna, 2003, n. 556.

[45]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 525 and following

[46]De gratia Christi, cp. 21, No. 22, PL., 44, 370; cf. Op. Imperfect. contra Jul., lib. 3, cp. 114, PL., 45, 1296; De gratia et lib. arb., cp. 19, No. 40, PL., 44, 905

[47]Lib. de gratia Christi, cp. 21, No. 22, PL., 44, 286; S. Prosper, Contr. Collat., Cp. 13, PL., 51, 251 C; 541 S. Fulgence, De veritate praedest., Lib. 1, cp. 21, n ° 44, PL., 65, 626

[48]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995 ,, t. 2 col. 540s

[49]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité t. 2 col. 541-543

[50]See St. John Chrysostom, “De incomprehensibili contra anomaeos”, Hom. 1, No. 1, PG., 48, 701-702; cf. S. Cesario, “Sermo 29”, n ° 2, ed. Morin, p. 121; St. Gregory the Great, "Moralia in Iob", lib. 20, cp. 7, n ° 17, PL., 76, 146-147

[51]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 561

[52]"Sermon for Quinquagesima Sunday", www.santantonio.org, http://www.santantonio.org/it/sermoni/sermoni-domenicali/domenica-di-quinquagesima

[53]II- II q. 24 a.2 my translation, cf. Thomas Aquinas, "The Theological Sum", Edizioni Studio Domanicano https://www.edizionistudiodomenicano.it/on-line.php

[54]S. Tommaso d'Aquino, “Sum against the Gentiles”, Unione Tipografico-Editrice Torinese; First edition eBook: March 2013, l. III c. 151

[55]St. Augustine “Speech n. 350 "translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/discorsi/discorso_509_testo.htm

[56]S. Tommaso d 'Aquino “Sum against the Gentiles”, Unione Tipografico-Editrice Torinese; First edition eBook: March 2013, l. III, nn. 115, 116 and 117

[57]S. Tommaso d 'Aquino “The perfection of the spiritual life” Unione Tipografico-Editrice Torinese, First edition eBook: March 2013, n. 6

[58]St. Augustine “Commentary on the Gospel of John” Homily 75,5, translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/commento_vsg/index2. htm

[59]See in Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 25 q. 2 a. 1 qc. 2 to 3; Super Sent., Lib. 4 d. 15 q. 2 a. 1 qc. 4 arg. 3; Super Sent., Lib. 4 d. 17 q. 3 a. 1 qc. 4 to 3; De malo, q. 7 a. 1 to 8; Super Rom. C. 13 l.2; Super Gal, c.6, l.1

[60]II-II q. 33 a. 2, my translation following that of the ESD in 2001 CD Rom

[61]Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith “On the pastoral care of the divorced and remarried. Documents, comments and studies, ”Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Vatican City 1998, p. 24; S. Tommaso Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 37 q. 1 a. 4; II-II q. 120 a. 1; C. Ruini “Ruini: communion for the divorced and remarried is not possible. The magisterium is clear and cannot be changed ", Il Timone, 13 October 2014 http://www.iltimone.org/news-timone/ruini-la-comunione-ai-divorziati-risposati-non-pos/

[62]Pope Francis, “Charter of the Holy Father Francisco a los obispos de la region pastoral de Buenos Aires en respuesta to the document“ Criterios basicos para la aplicacion del capitulo VIII de la Amoris Laetitia ”, www.vatican.va, http: // w2. vatican.va/content/francesco/es/letters/2016/documents/papa-francesco_20160905_regione-pastorale-buenos-aires.html

[63]"Catechismo Tridentino", and Cantagalli 1992, n. 299 https://www.maranatha.it/catrident/25page.htm

[64]“The city of God” c. XIX n. 13 translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/cdd/index2.htm

[65]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité,, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 566

[66]See Origen, “Homilia II in Canticum Canticorum”, n ° 7, PG., 13, 54; “In Canticum Canticorum”, l. 3. PG., 13, 155-160

[67]S. Gregorio di Nissa "Homilies on the Song of Songs" Ed. Città Nuova Rome 1996, p. 115s

[68]See "Sermo 100", n. 2.2 http://www.augustinus.it/latino/discorsi/discorso_129_testo.htm; "Sermo 65", 8 http://www.augustinus.it/latino/discorsi/discorso_085_testo.htm

[69]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité,, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 566

[70]St. Augustine, "De doctrina cristiano.", Lib. 1, cp. 27, n ° 28, PL., 34, 29 translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/dottrina_cristiana/index2.htm

[71]St. Augustine, “The City of God”, Lib. 19, cp. 14, PL., 41.643 translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/cdd/index2.htm

[72]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité,, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 566s; Martyrium Polycarpi, 1, 2

[73]"Catechism of Tridentine", ed. Cantagalli, 1992, n. 249 http://www.maranatha.it/catrident/21page.htm

[74]cf Council of Trent, Sess. 14a, Doctrina de sacramento Paenitentiae, c. 4, Id., Sess. 14a, Canones de Paenitentia, canon 5, Heinrich Denzinger “Enchiridion symbolorum, definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei et morum” edited by P. Hünermann, Edizioni Dehoniane Bologna, 2003 n. 1676-1678. 1705; "Roman Catechism", 2, 5, 4: ed. P. Rodríguez (Vatican City-Pamplona 1989) p. 289; Catechism of the Catholic Church No. 1431

[75]See S. Tommaso d 'Aquino “The perfection of the spiritual life” Unione Tipografico-Editrice Torinese, First edition eBook: March 2013, n. 6 and 7

[76]S. Tommaso d 'Aquino “The perfection of the spiritual life” Unione Tipografico-Editrice Torinese, First edition eBook: March 2013, n. 6 and 7

[77]S. Tommaso d 'Aquino “The perfection of the spiritual life” Unione Tipografico-Editrice Torinese, First edition eBook: March 2013, n. 6 and 7

[78]S. Alfonso Maria de Liguori, "Protest to die well", in "Ascetic Works" Vol. IX, History and Literature Editions, Rome 1965, p. 452, www.intratext.com, http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ITASA0000/_P2UD.HTM

[79]See "Catechismo Tridentino", and Cantagalli 1992, n.249 http://www.maranatha.it/catrident/21page.htm

[80]St. Ignatius of Loyola "Spiritual Exercises", n. 165, my translation following the Spanish text and especially keeping in mind this translation made available by the Italian Jesuits on the internet on the gesuiti.it website, https://gesuiti.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Esercizi-Spiruali- text.pdf

[81]"Spiritual Exercises" n. 165s gesuiti.it, https://gesuiti.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Esercizi-Spiruali-testo.pdf

[82]See Heinrich Denzinger "Enchiridion symbolorum, definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei et morum" edited by P. Hünermann, Edizioni Dehoniane Bologna, 2003 n.1536 and 1568

[83]See VS 52; * * "The moral norm of" Humanae vitae "
and the pastoral task ”L'Osservatore Romano, 16 February 1989, p. 1, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19890216_norma-morale_it.html; S. Thomas Aquinas in Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 25 q. 2 a. 1 qc. 2 to 3; Super Sent., Lib. 4 d. 15 q. 2 a. 1 qc. 4 arg. 3; Super Sent., Lib. 4 d. 17 q. 3 a. 1 qc. 4 to 3; De malo, q. 7 a. 1 to 8; Super Rom c. 13 l.2; Super Gal, c.6, l.1; II-II q. 33 a. 2

[84]S. Caterina da Siena, “Il Dialogo”, edited by G. Cavallini, Siena, Cantagalli, 1995, 2nd ed. (Cateriniani Texts; I), chapter XI http://www.centrostudicateriniani.it/images/documenti/download/download-gratuiti/4-Il_Dialogo.pdf

[85]Online Vocabulary, item: "Ordering" in Online Vocabulary, Treccani (text consulted on 6.7.2020)

http://www.treccani.it/vocabolario/ordinazione/

[86]Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter "Libertas Praestantissimum" of 20 June 1888, n. 8, www.vatican.va, http://w2.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/it/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_20061888_libertas.html

[87]See I-II, q. 93, a. 3, ad 2: Ed. Leon. 7, 164 text quoted in Catechism of the Catholic Church n.1902

[88]See International Theological Commission "In search of a universal ethics: a new look at natural law" 20.5.2009, 1.3.22 www.vatican.va https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/ rc_con_cfaith_doc_20090520_legge-naturale_it.html # 1.3.% 20L% E2% 80% 99teaching% 20of% 20Sacra% 20Writing

[89]See International Theological Commission "In search of a universal ethics: a new look at natural law" 20.5.2009, 1.3.22 www.vatican.va https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/ rc_con_cfaith_doc_20090520_legge-naturale_it.html # 1.3.% 20L% E2% 80% 99teaching% 20of% 20Sacra% 20Writing

[90]See International Theological Commission "In search of a universal ethics: a new look at natural law" 20.5.2009, 1.3.23 www.vatican.va https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/ rc_con_cfaith_doc_20090520_legge-naturale_it.html # 1.3.% 20L% E2% 80% 99teaching% 20of% 20Sacra% 20Writing

[91]See Heinrich Denzinger "Enchiridion symbolorum, definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei et morum" edited by P. Hünermann, Edizioni Dehoniane Bologna, 2003

[92]St. Thomas Aquinas "In Duo Praecepta Caritatis et in Decem Legis Praecepta." Prologus: Opuscula Theologica, II, No. 1129, Ed. Taurinens. (1954), 245; cf Summa Theologiae, I-II, q. 91, a. 2; Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1955

[93]St. Thomas Aquinas, “In duo praecepta caritatis et in decem Legis praecepta expositio”, c. 1: Opera omnia, v. 27 (Paris 1875) p. 144.

[94]Leo XIII, Encyclical letter “Libertas praestantissimum”: Leonis XIII Acta 8, 219; www.vatican.va, https://www.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/it/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_20061888_libertas.html

[95]Enc. Libertas praestantissimum (20 June 1888): Leonis XIII PM Acta, VIII, Romae 1889, 219. cit. in John Paul II "Veritatis Splendor" n. 44

[96]Gaudium et Spes n. 74, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_it.html

[97]Gaudium et Spes n. 89, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_it.html

[98]Paul VI, Encyclical Letter "Humanae Vitae" of 1968 ,, www.vatican.va, http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/it/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html

[99]Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Past Constitution on the Church in the Contemporary World Gaudium et spes, n. 10

[100]Gaudium et Spes n. 79, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_it.html

[101]http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19751229_persona-humana_it.html

[102]Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith “Persona Humana” 22.1.1975, n. 4, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19751229_persona-humana_it.html

[103]Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith “Persona Humana” 22.1.1975, n. 4, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19751229_persona-humana_it.html

[104]Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Past Constitution on the Church in the contemporary world Gaudium et spes, 10; S. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Decl. on some questions of sexual ethics Persona humana (29 December 1975), 4 ...

[105]Sant'Agostino, De Trinitate, 14, 15, 21, (PL 42, 1052) translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of Città Nuova, Sant'Agostino - La Trinità (augustinus.it) online ; cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church No. 1955

[106]Vatican Council I, Dogmatic Constitution. Dei Filius, c. 2: DS 3005; Pius XII, Encyclical letter Humani generis: DS 3876

[107]Pius XII, "Humani generis" 12.8.1950 Introduction, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/it/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis.html

[108]Pontifical Biblical Commission "Bible and morals" 11.5.2008, 03.1.4 https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20080511_bibbia-e-morale_it.html

[109]Pontifical Biblical Commission "Bible and morals" 11.5.2008, 03.1.4 https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20080511_bibbia-e-morale_it.html

[110]Pontifical Biblical Commission "Bible and morals" 11.5.2008, 03.1.4 https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20080511_bibbia-e-morale_it.html

[111]Pen, Roman. "Love boundless" (Italian Edition) (positions in Kindle 561-562). San Paolo Editions. Kindle Edition 2019

[112]Pen, Roman. "Love boundless" (Italian Edition) (positions in Kindle 578-580). San Paolo Editions. 2019 Edition of the Kindle

[113]Cf. International Theological Commission “The Bible and morals. The biblical roots of Christian action ”11.5.2008 n. 2.1.3, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20080511_bibbia-e-morale_it.html

[114]International Theological Commission “Bible and morals. The biblical roots of Christian action ”11.5.2008 n. 2.1.3.18.b, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20080511_bibbia-e-morale_it.html

[115]Cf. International Theological Commission “The Bible and morals. The biblical roots of Christian action ”11.5.2008 n. 2.1.3.18.b, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20080511_bibbia-e-morale_it.html

[116] International Theological Commission “Bible and morals. The biblical roots of Christian action ”11.5.2008 n. 3.41, www.vatican.va http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20080511_bibbia-e-morale_it.html

[117] International Theological Commission “Bible and morals. The biblical roots of Christian action ”11.5.2008 n. 3.1.1.44, www.vatican.va http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20080511_bibbia-e-morale_it.html

[118] International Theological Commission “Bible and morals. The biblical roots of Christian action ”11.5.2008, www.vatican.va, nn. 46-79 http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20080511_bibbia-e-morale_it.html

[119]Cf. International Theological Commission “The Bible and morals. The biblical roots of Christian action ”11.5.2008, www.vatican.va, nn. 46-79 http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20080511_bibbia-e-morale_it.html

[120]St. Anthony of Padua “Quinquagesima Sunday Sermon” n. 12, http://www.centrostudiantoniani.it/, http://www.centrostudiantoniani.it/ Lista-sermoni

[121]International Theological Commission "In search of a universal ethics: a new look at natural law" 2009, nn.101-113, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/ rc_con_cfaith_doc_20090520_ natural-law_it.html

[122]S. Ambrogio, Expositio in Evangelium secundum Lucam, lib. 5, No. 73-80, PL., 15, 1655-1658; cf. S. Hilary, In Mattheum, cp. 4, PL., 9, 942; See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, Beauchesne 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 568

[123]Vatican Ecumenical Council I, Dogmatic Constitution. "Dei Filius", 24.4.1870, c. 2 https://www.vatican.va, https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-ix/it/documents/constitutio-dogmatica-dei-filius-24-aprilis-1870.html

[124]Conc. Vat. DB 1876, Constitution "De fide Cath.", Chap. II, De revelatione). " (Pius XII, "Humani generis" 12.8.1950 Introduction, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/it/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis.html

[125]Vatican Council I, Dogmatic Constitution. Dei Filius, c. 2: DS 3005; Pius XII, Encyclical letter Humani generis: DS 3876.

[126]See Saint Bonaventure, “Commentaria in quattuor libros Sententiarum”, 3, 37, 1, 3: Opera omnia, v. 3 (Ad Claras Aquas 1887) p. 819-820

[127]S. Tommaso d 'Aquino “The perfection of the spiritual life” Unione Tipografico-Editrice Torinese, First edition eBook: March 2013, nn. 2 and 6

[128]S. Paul VI "De Episcoporum muneribus" 15.6.1966, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/it/motu_proprio/documents/hf_p-vi_motu-proprio_19660615_de-episcoporum-muneribus .html

[129]See L. Chiappetta “The Code of Canon Law” EDB, Bologna, 2011 vol. I pp. 100s nos. 595.607

[130]Wernz “Ius canonicum ad codicis normam exactum work p. Petri Vidal s. J. ", Romae, Apud Aed. Universitatis Gregorianae, 1938 T. I, pp. 467s

[131]"Speech to the Officials and Lawyers of the Tribunal of the Roman Rota for the inauguration of the judicial year" of 21.1.2000, www.vatican.va, http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/it /speeches/2000/jan-mar/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_20000121_rota-romana.html

[132]See I-II q. 100 a. 8 ad 2 "Somma Theologica", translation taken from the online edition, Edizioni Studio Domenicano, https://www.edizionistudiodomenicano.it/Docs/Sfogliabili/La_Somma_Teologica_Seconda_Parte/index.html#993/z

[133]See Super Sent., Lib. 1 d. 47 q. 1 a. 4; Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 37 q. 1 a. 4; De malo, q. 3 a. 1 to 17; q. 15 a. 1 to 8

[134]S. Alfonso M. de Liguori "Education and practice for confessors", in "Works of St. Alfonso Maria de Liguori", Pier Giacinto Marietti, Turin 1880, Vol. IX, p. 54 ss, www.intratext.com, http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ITASA0000/_PWL.HTM#$6Y9

[135]See VS no. 13, 52, 67, 99, 102; ** "The moral norm of" Humanae vitae "
and the pastoral task ”L'Osservatore Romano, 16 February 1989, p. 1, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19890216_norma-morale_it.html; S. Thomas Aquinas in Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 25 q. 2 a. 1 qc. 2 to 3; I-II, q. 72 a. 6 to 2; II-II q. 33 a. 2 in c .; De malo, q. 7 a. 1 to 8; SuperRm. c. 13, l. 2; Super Gal., C.6, l.1

[136]fr. Angel Rodríguez Luño “The virtue of epikeia. Theory, history and application (I). From classical Greece up to F. Suárez * ”Acta Philosophica vol. 6 (1997), fasc. 2 - pp. 199

[137]See Angel Rodríguez Luño “The virtue of epikeia. Theory, history and application (I). From classical Greece up to F. Suárez * ”Acta Philosophica vol. 6 (1997), fasc. 2 p. 201

[138]See Preisker “ἐπιείκεια” in the “Great Lexicon of the New Testament” Paideia, Brescia 1967 v. III p. 704 ff

[139]See Preisker “ἐπιείκεια” in the “Great Lexicon of the New Testament” Paideia, Brescia 1967 v. III p. 704 ff

[140]Angel Rodríguez Luño “The virtue of epikeia. Theory, history and application (I). From classical Greece up to F. Suárez * ”Acta Philosophica vol. 6 (1997), fasc. 2 p. 214

[141]See St. Thomas “In decem libros Ethicorum Aristotelis ad Nicomachum Expositio”, Marietti, Turin - Rome 1964, lib. V n. 1081; Angel Rodríguez Luño “The virtue of epikeia. Theory, history and application (I). From classical Greece up to F. Suárez * ”Acta Philosophica vol. 6 (1997), fasc. 2 - pp. 206

[142]See Angel Rodríguez Luño “The virtue of epikeia. Theory, history and application (I). From classical Greece up to F. Suárez * ”Acta Philosophica vol. 6 (1997), fasc. 2 - p. 215 s

[143]in Super Sent., lib. 3 d. 25 q. 2 a. 1 qc. 2 to 3; I-II, q. 72 a. 6 to 2; II-II q. 33 a. 2 in c .; De malo, q. 7 a. 1 to 8; Super Rom. C. 13, l. 2; Super Gal, c.6, l.1

[144]We quote the Latin text of Cajetan found in s. Thomae Aquinatis “Secunda secundae Summae Theologiae… cum commentariis Thomae De Vio Caietiani” in “S. Thomae Aquinatis Opera Omnia ”V. IX Typographia Polyglot SC De Propaganda Fide, Rome 1891, commentary on II-II q. 120 a. 1, p. 469 https://archive.org/details/operaomniaiussui09thom/page/ii/mode/2up?view=theater

[145]S. Alphonsi Mariae de Ligorio: “Theologia Moralis” Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis MCCCCIX, Editio photomechanica. Sumptibus CssR, Romae, 1953, t. I, lI, t. II, c. IV, d. IV, n. 201 p. 182

[146]“Ius canonicum ad codicis normam exactum work p. Petri Vidal s. J. ", Romae, Apud Aed. Universitatis Gregorianae, 1938 T. I, pp. 71s

[147]"Introduction" in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "On the pastoral care of the divorced and remarried", LEV, Vatican City 1998, p. 20-29, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19980101_ratzinger-comm-divorced_it.html#_ftn1

[148]GL Müller: “Indissolubility of marriage and the debate on the divorced and remarried and the Sacraments” L'Osservatore Romano, ed. daily, Year CLIII, n. 243, Merc. 23/10/2013, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/muller/rc_con_cfaith_20131023_divorziati-risposati-sacramenti_it.html

[149]C. Ruini “Ruini: communion for the divorced and remarried is not possible. The magisterium is clear and cannot be changed ", Il Timone, 13 October 2014 http://www.iltimone.org/news-timone/ruini-la-comunione-ai-divorziati-risposati-non-pos/

[150]International Theological Commission, "The sensus fidei in the life of the Church" of 10.6.2014 n. 52, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_20140610_sensus-fidei_it.html#_ftnref68

[151]International Theological Commission, "The sensus fidei in the life of the Church" of 10.6.2014 n. 52, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_20140610_sensus-fidei_it.html#_ftnref68

[152]"Speech at the conclusion of the XIV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops" (24 October 2015): "L'Osservatore Romano", 26-27 October 2015, p. 13)

[153]International Theological Commission "In search of a universal ethics: a new look at natural law" (2009), 59, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20090520_legge- natural_it.html

[154]International Theological Commission "In search of a universal ethics: a new look at natural law" (2009), nn. 101-113, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/ cti_documents / rc_con_cfaith_doc_20090520_legge-naturale_it.html

[155]See in Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 25 q. 2 a. 1 qc. 2 to 3; Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 25 q. 2 a. 1 qc. 2 to 3; Super Sent., Lib. 4 d. 15 q. 2 a. 1 qc. 4 arg. 3; Super Sent., Lib. 4 d. 17 q. 3 a. 1 qc. 4 to 3; De malo, q. 7 a. 1 to 8; Super Rom. C. 13 l.2; Super Gal, c.6, l.1

[156]Marco Tosatti, "Synod: how I handle it ...", La Stampa, The blog of La Stampa, 21 September 2014
https://www.lastampa.it/blogs/2014/09/21/news/sinodo-come-lo-manovro-1.37276215  attualmente, 24.5.2021, l’articolo è stranamente  scomparso dal sito ma si può trovare qui  https://anticattocomunismo.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/sinodo-come-lo-manovro/

[157]Lorenzo Bertocchi "Kasper: Divorced and remarried, the Pope has opened the door", La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana 26-04-2016 http://lanuovabq.it/it/kasper-divorziati-risposati-il-papa-ha- Aperto-la -port # .Vzcm7XRyzqA

[158]See B. Williams "Baldisseri: Pope Francis Approved Controversial Midterm Relatio" One Peter Five 29.1.2015 https://onepeterfive.com/baldisseri-pope-francis-approved-controversial-midterm-relatio/

[159]My translation by Christa Pongratz-Lippitt, “Cardinal Marx: Pope Francis has pushed open the doors of the church”, National Catholic Reporter 28-10-2014 https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/cardinal- marx-pope-francis-has-pushed-open-doors-church

[160]L. Scrosati "German Synod:« We freely interpret the Magisterium »" La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana 06-02-2020 https://lanuovabq.it/it/sinodo-tedesco-interpretiamo-liberamente-il-magistero

[161]La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana "Five questions on which Catholic morality is at stake" La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana 14.11.2016 https://lanuovabq.it/it/cinque-domande-su-cui-si-gioca-la-morale-cattolica

[162]Fernández, Víctor M., “The trinitarian dimension of the moral II: profundización del aspecto ético a la luz de“ Deus caritas est ”” [en línea]. Theology, 89 (2006). page 150 Available at: http://bibliotecadigital.uca.edu.ar/repositorio/rectorado/dimension-trinitaria-moral-etico-fernandez.pdf

[163]See VM Fernández, “Vida trinitaria, normas éticas y fragilidad humana. Algunas breves precisiones ”[en línea]. Universitas, 6 (2011) pp. 68s Available at: https://repositorio.uca.edu.ar/handle/123456789/7827, consultation of 15.10.2020

[164]Pontifical Council for the Family, "Vademecum for confessors on certain moral issues relating to married life." 1997 n. 3, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia//pontifical_councils/family/documents/rc_pc_family_doc_12021997_vademecum_it.html#_ftnref43

[165]Fernández, Víctor M., La dimensión trinitaria de la moral II:

profundización of the ethical aspect in the light of “Deus caritas est” [en línea].

Theology, 89 (2006). Available at: http://bibliotecadigital.uca.edu.ar/repositorio/rectorado/dimension-trinitaria-moral-etico-fernandez.pdf

[166]See Mons. VM Fernández: "El capítulo VIII de Amoris Laetitia: lo que queda después de la tormenta." in Medellin, vol. XLIII / No. 168 / Mayo - August (2017) / pp. 463s www.archidiocesisgranada.es, http://www.archidiocesisgranada.es/images/pdf/Amoris-Laetitia.-Articulo-Buenos-Aires.pdf (accessed on 29.5.2021)

[167]See Mons. VM Fernández: "El capítulo VIII de Amoris Laetitia: lo que queda después de la tormenta." in Medellin, vol. XLIII / No. 168 / Mayo - August (2017) / p. 451s. 459s)

[168]Fumagalli A., “Sexual love. Foundations and theological-moral criteria ”Queriniana 2020 p. 174

[169]See Mons. VM Fernández: "El capítulo VIII de Amoris Laetitia: lo que queda después de la tormenta." in Medellin, vol. XLIII / No. 168 / Mayo - August (2017) / p. 453 .456. 463. 464 www.archidiocesisgranada.es, http://www.archidiocesisgranada.es/images/pdf/Amoris-Laetitia.-Articulo-Buenos-Aires.pdf (accessed on 29.5.2021)

[170]See Denzinger "Enchiridion symbolorum, definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei et morum" edited by P. Hünermann, Edizioni Dehoniane Bologna, 2003 n.1536 and 1568

[171]See Mons. VM Fernández: "El capítulo VIII de Amoris Laetitia: lo que queda después de la tormenta." in Medellin, vol. XLIII / No. 168 / Mayo - August (2017) / p. 467

[172]La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana "Five questions on which Catholic morality is at stake" La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana 14.11.2016 https://lanuovabq.it/it/cinque-domande-su-cui-si-gioca-la-morale-cattolica

[173]See Fernández, Víctor M., La dimensión trinitaria de la moral II:

profundización of the ethical aspect in the light of “Deus caritas est” [en línea].

Theology, 89 (2006) p. 160. Available at: http://bibliotecadigital.uca.edu.ar/repositorio/rectorado/dimension-trinitaria-moral-etico-fernandez.pdf

[174]http://www.aemaet.de/index.php/aemaet/article/view/35/pdf; J. Seifert “Sulla Amoris laetitia di Papa Francesco: gioie, domande, tristezze.” www.corrispondenzaromana.it 8.6.2016 https://www.corrispondenzaromana.it/le-lacrime-di-gesu-sulla-amoris-laetitia/

[175]http://www.aemaet.de/index.php/aemaet/article/view/44/pdf_1 ;  Josef Seifert: “La logica pura minaccia di distruggere l’intera dottrina morale della Chiesa?” Corrispondenza Romana, 2017  https://www.corrispondenzaromana.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Testo-Seifert-italiano.pdf?it

[176]L. Scrosati, "Mitigating out of the game, marriage is not a moral", La Bussola Quotidiana, 11.3.2018 http://www.lanuovabq.it/it/attenuanti-in-fuori-gioco-il-matrimonio-non -and-a-morality

[177]See Archidiocesis de Granada "Note from the Arzobispado de Granada" 21.8.2017 https://www.archidiocesisgranada.es/index.php/noticias/notas-de-prensa-y-comunicados/nota-del-arzobispado-de-granada -2

[178]L. Moia "New John Paul II Institute, here are the chairs and teachers" Avvenire, 11 September 2019 https://www.avvenire.it/chiesa/pagine/nomine-istituto-giovanni-paolo-ii

[179]Times "What is really at risk in the clash over the John Paul II Institute" Times, 2-8-2019 https://www.tempi.it/che-cosa-ea-rischio-davvero-nello-scontro-sullistituto- john-paul-ii /

[180]“Filial plea to Pope Francis on the future of the family” https://www.supplicafiliale.org/firstcampaign; https://www.atfp.it/rivista-tfp/2015/233-marzo-2015/1056-supplica-filiale-a-papa-francesco-sul-futuro-della-famigli a)

[181]M. Tosatti “« Ok to homosexual acts ». In Belgium it is the Rainbow Church "The New Daily Compass 7.5.2018 http://lanuovabq.it/it/ok-agli-atti-omosessuali-in-belgio-e-chiesa-arcobaleno

[182]"Distinguished secular and ecclesiastical scholars accuse Pope Francis of heresy in an Open Letter", Chiesa and post Council 4.2019 http://chiesaepostconcilio.blogspot.com/2019/04/illustri-teologi-e-studiosi-accusano.html

[183]Fumagalli A., “Sexual love. Foundations and theological-moral criteria ”Queriniana 2020 p. 174

[184]“A scholar embarrasses Card. Cupich asking if the Pope's "paradigm shift" means a 'radical' change in doctrine ", Church and post-council, February 17, 2018 http://chiesaepostconcilio.blogspot.it/2018/02/uno-studioso-mette-in -embarrass-il-card.html, the translation offered by this site was in one case retouched by me

[185]M. Pakaluk "Ethicist says ghostwriter's role in 'Amoris' is troubling" Crux 16.1.2017 https://cruxnow.com/commentary/2017/01/ethicist-says-ghostwriters-role-amoris-troubling/

[186]S. Alfonso Maria de Liguori "The true Bride of Jesus Christ", in "Ascetic Works" Voll. XIV-XV, CSSR, Rome 1935 c. XI § 2, www.intratext.com, http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ITASA0000/_P38G.HTM#1HP

[187]S. Alfonso Maria de Liguori "The true Bride of Jesus Christ", in "Ascetic Works" Voll. XIV-XV, CSSR, Rome 1935 c. XI § 2, www.intratext.com, http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ITASA0000/_P38G.HTM#1HP

[188]Giulio Meiattini, “Amoris laetitia. The sacraments reduced to morality ", Ed. La Fontana di Siloe, 2018 p. 52s

[189]Pope Francis, “Charter of the Holy Father Francisco a los obispos de la region pastoral de Buenos Aires en respuesta to the document“ Criterios basicos para la aplicacion del capitulo VIII de la Amoris Laetitia ”, www.vatican.va, http: // w2. vatican.va/content/francesco/es/letters/2016/documents/papa-francesco_20160905_regione-pastorale-buenos-aires.html

[190]Lorenzo Bertocchi "Kasper: Divorced and remarried, the Pope has opened the door", La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana 26-04-2016 http://lanuovabq.it/it/kasper-divorziati-risposati-il-papa-ha- Aperto-la -port # .Vzcm7XRyzqA

[191]See F. Coccopalmerio, “The eighth chapter of the post-synodal exhortation Amoris laetitia”, Vatican City 2017 p. 21

[192]Iacopo Iadarola "L'Amoris laetitia in the centenary of Communion for the remarried" La Stampa, Vatican Insider, April 09, 2017 https://www.academia.edu/34467610/L_Amoris_laetitia_nel_centenario_della_Comunione_data_ai_risposati_La_Stampa

[193]La Fede Quotidiana "An Austrian bishop:" Communion for the divorced and remarried is an irreversible practice ", La Fede Quotidiana 11-1-2017 http://www.lafedequotidiana.it/un-vescovo-austriaco-la-comunione-ai- divorced-remarried-irreversible-practice /

[194]St. Magister “Francesco and Antonio, a couple in excellent Company” www.chiesa.espressonline.it 12.4.2016 http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/ Articolo/1351273.html

[195]My translation by Christa Pongratz-Lippitt, “Cardinal Marx: Pope Francis has pushed open the doors of the church”, National Catholic Reporter 28-10-2014 https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/cardinal- marx-pope-francis-has-pushed-open-doors-church

[196]L. Moia “Fight against abuses in the Church. Homosexuality and pedophilia. Ideas to understand. " Avvenire, February 19, 2019 https://www.avvenire.it/chiesa/pagine/abusi-e-omosessualita

[197]"Exclusive: Viganò reveals what really happened when Pope Francis met privately with Kim Davis" LifeSiteNews 31-8-2018 https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/exclusive-vigano-reveals-what-really-happened-when-pope -francis-met-private; "The Man Who Took On Pope Francis: The Story Behind the Viganò Letter" The New York Times 28-8-2018 https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/28/world/europe/archbishop-carlo-maria -vigano-pope-francis.html

[198]Sergio Rame "If a gay activist reads at Mass with Pope Francis" Wed, 30/09/2015 http://www.ilgiornale.it/news/mondo/se-attivista-gay-legge-messa-papa-francesco-1177329 .html

[199]Ermes Dovico "Father Martin's errors explained by Monsignor Chaput" 21.9.2019, www.iltimone.org, http://www.iltimone.org/news-timone/gli-errori-padre-martin-spiegati-monsignor-chaput /; Sabino Paciolla “Father James Martin:“ Pope Francis has LGBT friends. And he has appointed many cardinals, archbishops and bishops who support the LGBT world ", 3.7.2019, www.sabinopaciolla.com, https://www.sabinopaciolla.com/padre-james-martin-papa-francesco-ha-amici -lgbt-and-has-appointed-many-cardinals-archbishops-and-bishops-who-support-the-lgbt-world /; "Pope Francis: God makes himself close to everyone with a Father's heart" www.vaticannews.va, 27.6.2021, https://www.vaticannews.va/it/papa/news/2021-06/lettera-del-papa -to-father-james-martin.html

[200]www.sabinopaciolla.com, 6.11.2019, https://www.sabinopaciolla.com/una-foto-che-certifica-un-cambio-di-paradigma/

[201]S. Paciolla "A photo that certifies a" paradigm shift "www.sabinopaciolla.com, 6.11.2019, https://www.sabinopaciolla.com/una-foto-che-certifica-un-cambio-di-paradigma/

[202]Valli "Red caps of Bergogliano merit." Aldo Maria Valli 1.9.2019 https://www.corrispondenzaromana.it/notizie-dalla-rete/berrette-rosse-al-merito-bergogliano/

[203]Roman Correspondence "Does Pope Francis open the doors to" queer theology "?" Roman Correspondence 3.2.2018 https://www.corrispondenzaromana.it/papa-francesco-apre-le-porte-alla-teologia-queer/

[204]M. Tosatti “« Ok to homosexual acts ». In Belgium it is the Rainbow Church "The New Daily Compass 7.5.2018 http://lanuovabq.it/it/ok-agli-atti-omosessuali-in-belgio-e-chiesa-arcobaleno

[205]"Distinguished secular and ecclesiastical scholars accuse Pope Francis of heresy in an Open Letter", Church and post council, April 30, 2019 http://chiesaepostconcilio.blogspot.com/2019/04/illustri-teologi-e-studiosi-accusano.html

[206]Sabino Paciolla “Card. Cupich: "It is not our address to deny Holy Communion to married couples linked by same-sex marriage" 10.10.2018, www.sabinopaciolla.com, https://www.sabinopaciolla.com/card-cupich-non-e-nostro-address- deny-holy-communion-to-married-persons-bound-by-same-sex-marriage /

[207]The New Daily Compass "Cardinal Marx opens to the blessings of gay couples", The New Daily Compass of 6-2-2018 http://www.lanuovabq.it/it/cardinal-marx-apre-alle-benedizioni-delle-coppie -gay; La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana "Chaput responds to Cardinal Marx on blessings for gay couples", La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana, 8-2-2018 http://www.lanuovabq.it/it/chaput-risponde-al-cardinale-marx-sulle - blessings-to-gay-couples; Lorenzo Bertocchi “Homoeretic” blessings, stop to the sacrilegious cardinal ”, La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana 10-02-2018 http://www.lanuovabq.it/it/benedizioni-omoeretici-stop-al-cardinale-sacrilego; Annarosa Rossetto "Austrian diocese confirms that a Catholic priest celebrated a liturgy for the civil union between two women" www.sabinopaciolla.com, 14.11.2019 https://www.sabinopaciolla.com/diocesi-austriaca-conferma-che- a-Catholic-priest-celebrated-a-liturgy-for-civil-union-between-two-women /; cf. S. Paciolla "Blessings of homosexual couples: The Vatican" discriminates against homosexual people and their life plans "www.sabinopaciolla.com 24.3.2021
https://www.sabinopaciolla.com/benedizioni-coppie-omosessuali-il-vaticano-discrimina-le-persone-omosessuali-e-i-loro-progetti-di-vita/ ;  M. Tosatti “Austria. 350 Preti: “Continueremo a Benedire le Coppie Omosessuali” Stilum Curiae 17.3.2021 Austria. 350 Preti: “Continueremo a Benedire le Coppie Omosessuali”. : STILUM CURIAE (marcotosatti.com); L. Grotti “La benedizione delle coppie gay può portare la Chiesa tedesca allo «scisma»” www.tempi.it 7.5.2021 https://www.tempi.it/benedizione-coppie-gay-chiesa-germania-papa-scisma/

[208]Marco Tosatti, "Synod: how I handle it ...", La Stampa, The blog of La Stampa, 21 September 2014
https://www.lastampa.it/blogs/2014/09/21/news/sinodo-come-lo-manovro-1.37276215 attualmente, 24.5.2021, l’articolo è scomparso dal sito ma si può trovare qui  https://anticattocomunismo.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/sinodo-come-lo-manovro/

[209]Mons. VM Fernandez: "El capítulo VIII de Amoris Laetitia: lo que queda después de la tormenta." in Medellin, vol. XLIII / No. 168 / Mayo - August (2017) / p. 456

[210]See II-II, q. 24 a. 10 "Somma Theologica", translation taken from the online edition, Edizioni Studio Domenicano, https://www.edizionistudiodomenicano.it/Docs/Sfogliabili/La_Somma_Teologica_Seconda_Parte_2/index.html#258

[211]St. Gregory the Great “Quadraginta Homiliarum in Evangelia Libri duo”, PL. 76, h. XXX, c. 1221

[212]"Super Genesim ad litteram", c. 8, 12, 26 PL. 34,383; translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online http://www.augustinus.it/italiano/genesi_lettera/index2.htm

[213]See St. Thomas Aquinas “Sum Theological” II-II, q. 24 a.12, online edition, ESD, https://www.edizionistudiodomenicano.it/Docs/Sfogliabili/La_Somma_Teologica_Seconda_Parte_2/index.html#262/z

[214]See G. Bonsirven, Le Judaisme palestinien au temps de Iésus-Christ ", Paris 1935., v. I, p. 199 s.)

[215]R. Pen. "Love boundless" (Italian Edition) (positions in Kindle 806-812). San Paolo Editions. Kindle Edition

[216]S. Agostino, “Sermo 265”, cp. 8, No. 9, PL., 38, 1223; "Speech 265" n. 8.9 https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/discorsi/index2.htm cfr. Tractatus 87 in Joan., No. 1, PL., 35, 1852

[217]See S. Isidoro, “Differentiarum liber”. Lib. 2, No. 143, PL., 83, 92D; St. Gregory the Great, "Moralia in Iob", lib. 7, cp. 24, PL., 75, 780

[218]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité Beauchesne 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 564s

[219]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité Beauchesne 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 564s

[220]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité Beauchesne 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 565

[221]See Clemente Alessandrino “Stromata” IV, cp. 13-14, PG., 8, 1360 sq m; cf. S. Prospero, ”Expositio in ps. 100 ", verse 3, PL., 51, 278A; Expositio in ps. 129, v. 21-22, col. 398 BC

[222]"Contra Adimantium.", Cp. 17, n. 1-5, PL., 42, 157 sq m; "Sermo LXXI", n ° 4, PL., 38, 446-447

[223]"Sermo 17", n ° 2, PL., 38, 910; “Sermo 176”, No. 2, PL., 38, 950; "Sermo 71", n ° 19, PL., 38,454-455

[224]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité Beauchesne 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 567

[225]S. Ambrogio, “Expositio in Evangelium secundum Lucam”, lib. 5, No. 73-80, PL., 15, 1655-1658; cf. S. Ilario, “In Mattheum”, cp. 4, PL., 9, 942

[226]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité Beauchesne 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 568

[227]See S. Agostino, “Sermo 317”, n ° 1, PL., 38, 1437 translation taken from the site www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https: //www.www.augustinus. it .it / italian / discourses / index2.htm

[228]See St. Augustine, “Commentary on the letter of St. Giovanni ", tr. 1, no. 9. PL., 35, 1984, www.augustinus.it, https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/commento_lsg/index2.htm; cf. tr. 8, no. 10, col. 2012; tr. 9, no. 3, 2047

[229]See Origen, “In Canticum Canticorum”, lib. 2, no. 8, PG., 13, 54; S. Gregorio di Nissa, “Homilia 4 in Canticum”, PG., 44, 848 A

[230]See St. Gregory of Nyssa, PG., 46, 702-721; s. Asterio d'Amasea, PG., 40, 337; St. John Chrysostom, PG., 59, 501, 699; PG., 63, 929; S. Agostino, “Sermo 317”, PL., 38, 1437; S. Massimo of Turin, PL., 57, 382) (see Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller "La charité chez le péres" in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité Beauchesne 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 568

[231]See J. Bremond, Les Pères du désert. Coll. Les Moralistes chrétiens, Paris, Gabalda, 1927, t. II, p. 328-344

[232]S. Alfonso Maria de Liguori "Education to the people" in "Works of S. Alfonso Maria de Liguori", Pier Giacinto Marietti, Vol. VIII, Turin 1880 pp. 911ss, www.intratext.com, http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ITASA0000/_PV3.HTM

[233]S. Alfonso Maria de Liguori, “Instruction and practice for confessors”, in “Works of S. Alfonso Maria de Liguori”, Pier Giacinto Marietti, Vol. IX, Turin 1880, p. 88, www.intratext.com, http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ITASA0000/_PWR.HTM

[234]Pontifical Council for the Family, "Vademecum for confessors on certain moral issues relating to married life." 1997 n. 3, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia//pontifical_councils/family/documents/rc_pc_family_doc_12021997_vademecum_it.html#_ftnref43

[235]Vatican Council II, Pastoral Constitution "Gaudium et spes", 7.12.1965, nos. 24.27 www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_it.html

[236]Enc. Humanae vitae (25 July 1968), 29 www.vatican.va https://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/it/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html

[237]John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation “Reconciliatio et Paenitentia” n. 34, www.vatican.va, https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/it/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_02121984_reconciliatio-et-paenitentia.html

[238]John Paul II “Familiaris Consortio” 22.11.1992, www.vatican.va, n. 33 http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/it/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_19811122_familiaris-consortio.html

[239]See VS no. 95-96; John Paul II “Familiaris Consortio” 22.11.1992, www.vatican.va, n. 34 http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/it/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_19811122_familiaris-consortio.html

[240]“Letter to the Christians of Magnesia”, Intr .; Capp. 1, 1 5, 2; Funk 1, 191-195; Office of Readings of the XXVI Sun. TO www.chiesacattolica.it https://www.chiesacattolica.it/la-liturgia-delle-ore/?data=20201003&ora= ufficio-delle-letture&data-liturgia=20201004

[241]“Letter to the Christians of Magnesia”, Intr .; Capp. 1, 1 5, 2; Funk 1, 191-195; Office of Readings of the XXVI Sun. TO www.chiesacattolica.it https://www.chiesacattolica.it/la-liturgia-delle-ore/?data=20201003&ora= ufficio-delle-letture&data-liturgia=20201004

[242]St. Ignatius of Antioch “Letter to the Christians of Magnesia”, Intr .; Capp. 1, 1 5, 2; Funk 1, 191-195; Office of Readings of the XXVI Sun. TO www.chiesacattolica.it https://www.chiesacattolica.it/la-liturgia-delle-ore/?data=20201003&ora= ufficio-delle-letture&data-liturgia=20201004

[243]St. Ignatius of Antioch “Letter to the Christians of Magnesia”, Intr .; Capp. 1, 1 5, 2; Funk 1, 191-195; Office of Readings of the XXVI Sun. TO www.chiesacattolica.it https://www.chiesacattolica.it/la-liturgia-delle-ore/?data=20201003&ora= ufficio-delle-letture&data-liturgia=20201004

[244]Matthew Boudway and Grant Gallicho "An Interview with Cardinal Walter Kasper." Commonweal Magazine, May 7, 2014

https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/interview-cardinal-walter-kasper

[245]Pope Pius IX, Encyclical Letter "Quod Numquam" 5.2.1875 www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/content/pius-ix/it/documents/enciclica-quod-nunquam-5-febebruary-1875 .html

[246]S. Luigi Grignon de Montfort “Circular letter to the friends of the Cross” in S. Luigi M. Grignon de Montfort “Works” Edizioni Monfortane, Rome, 1990 p. 280

[247]Father Disma CP "Practical principles of the Sapientia Crucis according to the doctrine of St. Paul of the Cross.", Novastampa, 1988, available free online on the website apologetica-cattolica.net,

[248]“From the“ Writings ”of Saint Rose of Lima, virgin

“To the doctor Castillo”; and. L. Getino, La Patrona de América, Madrid 1928, pp. 54-55 in Liturgy of the Hours, Ed. LEV, 2007, vol. 4, 23 August, www.maranatha.it, http://www-maranatha-it.blogspot.com/2010/08/santa-rosa-da-lima-vergine-23-agosto.html

[249]S. Luigi Grignon de Montfort “Circular letter to the friends of the Cross” in S. Luigi Grignon de Montfort “Works” Edizioni Monfortane, Rome, 1990 p. 265

[250]S. Luigi Grignon de Montfort “Circular letter to the friends of the Cross” in S. Luigi Grignon de Montfort “Works” Edizioni Monfortane, Rome, 1990 p. 285-286

[251]S. Luigi Grignon de Montfort “Circular letter to the friends of the Cross” in S. Luigi Grignon de Montfort “Works” Edizioni Monfortane, Rome, 1990 p. 285-286

[252]See Homily at the conclusion of the V General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, 25.10.1980,

www.vatican.va, 25 October 1980, Conclusion of the V General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops | John Paul II (vatican.va)

[253]"Catechism of Tridentine", ed. Cantagalli, 1992, n. 249 http://www.maranatha.it/catrident/21page.htm

[254]S. Alfonso Maria de Liguori, "The love of souls", in "Ascetic Works" Vol. V, p. , CSSR, Rome 1934p. 56s c. VI, www.intratext.com, http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ITASA0000/__PZ.HTM

[255]"Catechismo Tridentino", and Cantagalli 1992, n.249 https://www.maranatha.it/catrident/21page.htm

[256]St. Thomas Aquinas, "The perfection of the spiritual life", in "Compendium of theology and other writings", UTET, Turin, First edition eBook: March 2013, c. 11, p. 644

[257]St. Gregory, the Great “Homilies on the Gospels” in “Homilies on the Gospels. Pastoral Rule ”(Classics of Religion) (Italian Edition) UTET. Edition of the Kindle 2013, Homily XXXVII nn. 2 . 3. 5; PL 76, n.1276

[258]St. Thomas Aquinas, “The perfection of the spiritual life”, in “Compendium of theology and other writings”, UTET, Turin, First edition eBook: March 2013, c. 11, pp. 644s

[259]S. Alfonso Maria de Liguori, “The love of souls” ”, in“ Ascetic Works ”Vol. V, CSSR, Rome 1934 p. 56s c. VI, www.intratext.com, http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ITASA0000/__PZ.HTM

[260]From the "Catechismo Tridentino", and Cantagalli 1992, n.249 available at this site https://www.maranatha.it/catrident/21page.htm

[261]St. Thomas Aquinas, "The perfection of the spiritual life", in "Compendium of theology and other writings", UTET, Turin, First edition eBook: March 2013, c. 11, p. 644

[262]Pope Francis, “Charter of the Holy Father Francisco a los obispos de la region pastoral de Buenos Aires en respuesta to the document“ Criterios basicos para la aplicacion del capitulo VIII de la Amoris Laetitia ”, www.vatican.va, http: // w2. vatican.va/content/francesco/es/letters/2016/documents/papa-francesco_20160905_regione-pastorale-buenos-aires.html

[263]St. Augustine “The Christian doctrine” Lib. 1, n ° 27.28, PL., 34, 29 translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/dottrina_cristiana/index2.htm

[264]“The city of God” c. XIX n. 13 translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/cdd/index2.htm

[265]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité Beauchesne 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 566

[266]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 566

[267]See Origen, “Homilia II in Canticum Canticorum”, n ° 8, PG., 13, 54; “In Canticum Canticorum”, l. 3. PG., 13, 155-160

[268]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995 ,, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 566

[269]S. Ambrogio, “Expositio in Evangelium secundum Lucam”, lib. 5, No. 73-80, PL., 15, 1655s

[270]S. Gregorio di Nissa "Homilies on the Song of Songs" Ed. Città Nuova Rome 1996, p. 115s

[271]See "Sermo 100", n. 2.2 www.augustinus.it, http://www.augustinus.it/latino/discorsi/discorso_129_testo.htm; "Sermo 65" n. 8, www.augustinus.it, http://www.augustinus.it/latino/discorsi/discorso_085_testo.htm

[272]St. Augustine, “De doctrina cristiano”. Lib. 1, n ° 24,24 PL., 34, 29 translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/dottrina_cristiana/index2.htm

[273]St. Augustine, "De doctrina cristiano", Lib. 1, n ° 24,24 PL., 34, 29 translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/dottrina_cristiana/index2.htm

[274]St. Augustine, “De doctrina cristiano” Lib. 1, n ° 24,24 PL., 34, 29 translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/dottrina_cristiana/index2.htm

[275]St. Augustine, “De doctrina cristiano”. Lib. 1, cp. 27, n ° 28, PL., 34, 29 translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/dottrina_cristiana/index2.htm

[276]S. Agostino, “De civitate Dei”, Lib. 19, cp. 14, PL., 41.643 translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/cdd/index2.htm

[277]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 566s; Martyrium Polycarpi, 1, 2

[278]"De doctrina cristiano" l. 1 n. 22.21 translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/dottrina_cristiana/index2.htm

[279]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité Beauchesne 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 566

[280]See Clemente Alessandrino “Stromata” IV, cp. 13-14, PG., 8, 1360 sq m; cf. S. Prospero, “Expositio in ps. 100 ", verse 3, PL., 51, 278A; “Expositio in ps. 129 ", v. 21-22, col. 398 BC

[281]S. Agostino “Sermo 174”, n ° 2, PL., 38, 910; “Sermo 176”, No. 2, PL., 38, 950; "Sermo 71", n ° 19, col. 454-455

[282]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité Beauchesne 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 567

[283]See St. Augustine, “Commentary on the letter of St. Giovanni ", tr. 1, no. 9. PL., 35, 1984 translation taken from the site www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/commento_lsg/index2.htm; cf. tr. 8, no. 10, col. 2012; tr. 9, no. 3, 2047

[284]See Origen, “In Canticum Canticorum”, lib. 2, no. 8, PG., 13, 54; S. Gregorio di Nissa, Homilia 4 in Canticum, PG., 44, 848 A

[285]S. Gregorio di Nissa "Homilies on the Song of Songs" Ed. Città Nuova Rome 1996, p. 115s

[286]S. Agostino, "Sermo 317", 2.2, PL., 38, 1437s translation taken from the website www.augustinus.it which publishes the works of the Città Nuova publisher online https://www.augustinus.it/italiano/discorsi/ index2.htm

[287]See Petri Lombardi “Libri IV Sententiarum” l. III d. XIX, Ad Claras Aquas 1916, T. II, p. 682

[288]Petri Lombardi “Libri IV Sententiarum” l. III d. XIX, Ad Claras Aquas 1916, T. II, p. 684

[289]S. Bonaventura “Commentary in IV libros Sententiarum Petri Lombardi. ", In" S. Bonaventurae Opera Omnia ”Ad Claras Aquas MDCCCLXXXVII, t. III, In III Sententiarum, p. 641 s

[290]S. Bonaventura “Commentary in IV libros Sententiarum Petri Lombardi. ", In" S. Bonaventurae Opera Omnia ”Ad Claras Aquas MDCCCLXXXVII, t. III, In III Sententiarum, p. 644

[291]See S. Bonaventura “Commentary in IV libros Sententiarum Petri Lombardi. ", In" S. Bonaventurae Opera Omnia ”Ad Claras Aquas MDCCCLXXXVII, t. III, In III Sententiarum, p. 646ss

[292]S. Alphonsi Mariae de Ligorio :, "Theologia moralis." Editio nova… edited and studied by L. Gaudé, C.SS.R, Romee 1905-1912, vols. I p. 314, l. II n. 22

[293]S. Alfonso Maria de 'Liguori, “Instruction and practice for confessors”, in “Works of S. Alfonso Maria de Liguori”, Pier Giacinto Marietti, Vol. IX, Turin 1880, page 81s. Chapter IV - Point I. Of the theological virtues, www.intratext.com, http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ITASA0000/_PWQ.HTM

[294]S. Alfonso M. de 'Liguori, “Instruction and practice for confessors”, Chapter IV - Warnings on the treaty of the first precept of the Decalogue. Point II. Of charity towards one's neighbor. n. 14 in “Works of S. Alfonso Maria de Liguori”, Pier Giacinto Marietti, Turin 1880, Vol. IX, p. 83, www.intratext.com, http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ITASA0000/__PWR.HTM

[295]Pius XI, “Caritate Christi compulsi” 3 May 1932 http://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/it/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19320503_caritate-christi-compulsi.html

[296]John XXIII, Letter "How many are you", 8.4.1962, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/content/john-xxiii/it/letters/1962/documents/hf_j-xxiii_let_19620408_quanti-siete.html

[297]Pius XII, “Address to the Hungarian faithful on the virtues of St. Margaret of Hungary "of 10.8.1957, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/it/speeches/1957/documents/hf_p-xii_spe_19570810_santa-margherita-ungheria.html

[298]St. Paul VI "Message to all priests of the Catholic Church", 30.6.1968, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/it/messages/pont-messages/documents /hf_p-vi_mess_19680630_priests.html

[299]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995 ,, ed. Beauchesne, 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 566

[300]Paul VI, "Discourse to the Sacred Roman Rota", January 28.1.1971, 1971, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/it/speeches/19710128/january/documents/hf_p-vi_spe_XNUMX_sacra -romana-rota.html

[301]See Jacques Farges and Marcel Viller “La charité chez le péres” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité Beauchesne 1932-1995, t. 2 col. 566

[302]See Patriarcado de Lisboa "Nota para a receção do capítulo VIII da exortação apostólica 'Amoris Laetitia'" 6.2.2018, www.patriarcado-lisboa.pt, https://www.patriarcado-lisboa.pt/site/index.php ? id = 8626

[303]See Msgr. A. Marto "Nota Pastoral sobre os fiéis divorciados a viver em nova união" O Senhor está perto de quem tem or coração ferido "(Sl 34, 19)" of 31.5.2018, www.leiria-fatima.pt , https://www.leiria-fatima.pt/o-senhor-esta-perto-de-quem-tem-o-coracao-ferido-sl-34-19-2/; Jeanne Smits, “Portuguese cardinal allows divorced and 'remarried' Catholics to receive Communion" Lifesite news 5.2.2020 https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/portuguese-cardinal-allows-divorced-and-remarried-catholics-to- receive-communion; Italian translation "Portuguese cardinal allows divorced and" remarried "Catholics to receive Communion" Communion/

[304]Lorenzo Bertocchi "Kasper: Divorced and remarried, the Pope has opened the door", La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana 26-04-2016 http://lanuovabq.it/it/kasper-divorziati-risposati-il-papa-ha- Aperto-la -port # .Vzcm7XRyzqA

[305]La Fede Quotidiana "An Austrian bishop:" Communion for the divorced and remarried is an irreversible practice ", La Fede Quotidiana 11-1-2017 http://www.lafedequotidiana.it/un-vescovo-austriaco-la-comunione-ai- divorced-remarried-irreversible-practice /

[306]St. Magister “Francesco and Antonio, a couple in excellent Company” www.chiesa.espressonline.it 12.4.2016 http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/ Articolo/1351273.html

[307]La Civiltà Cattolica, “A private meeting of the Pope with some Colombian Jesuits”, La Civiltà Cattolica year 2017, notebook 4015, volume IV pag. 3 - 10, 7 October 2017

[308]II-II q. 26 to.4.5; IIª-IIae q. 44 a. 8 to 2; Super Sent., Lib. 3 d. 29 q. 1 a. 5; De Virtutibus q. 4 art. 9; Super II Tim., Chap. 3 l.1

[309]Cf. S. Bonaventurae “Commentaria in quattuor libros Sententiarum”, l. III d. 29, a.1, q. 3

[310]S. Bonaventurae “Commentaria in quattuor libros Sententiarum”, l. III d. 29, a.1, q. 3 to 4m

[311]See Doctoris Seraphici s. Bonaventurae SRE Episc. Card. Opera Omnia, Ex Typographia Collegii Sancti Bonaventurae, Ad Claras Aquas, MCDCCCLXXXVII, vol. III p. 645

[312]See IIª-IIae q. 26 a. 2 co. “Somma Theologica”, translation taken from the online edition, Edizioni Studio Domenicano ,; https://www.edizionistudiodomenicano.it/Docs/Sfogliabili/La_Somma_Teologica_Seconda_Parte_2/index.html#286/z

[313]S. Bonaventura “Commentary in IV libros Sententiarum Petri Lombardi. ", In" S. Bonaventurae Opera Omnia ”Ad Claras Aquas MDCCCLXXXVII, t. III, In III Sententiarum, p. 644, d. 29, a.1, q. 3

[314]S. Caterina da Siena, The Dialogue, edited by G. Cavallini, Siena, Cantagalli, 1995, 2nd ed.

(Texts Cateriniani; I), chapter XI www.centrostudicateriniani.it, http://www.centrostudicateriniani.it/images/documenti/download/download-gratuiti/4-Il_Dialogo.pdf

[315]See the Latin text of Cajetan found in s. Thomae Aquinatis "Secunda secundae Summae Theologiae ... with commentariis Thomae De Vio Caietiani" in "S. Thomae Aquinatis Opera Omnia ”V. IX Typographia Polyglot SC De Propaganda Fide, Rome 1895, T. VII p. 213. 214, commentary on II-II q. 26 a. 4 and 5

[316]the Latin text of Cajetan is found in s. Thomae Aquinatis "Secunda secundae Summae Theologiae ... with commentariis Thomae De Vio Caietiani" in "S. Thomae Aquinatis Opera Omnia ”V. IX Typographia Polyglot SC De Propaganda Fide, Rome 1891, T. IX p. 75, commentary on II-II q. 64 a. 7

[317]S. Alphonsi Mariae de Ligorio: “Theologia moralis”: editio nova cum antiquis editionibus diligenter collata in singulis auctorum allegationibus recognita notisque criticis et commentariis illustrated / edited and studied P. Leonardi Gaudé, Romee 1905, vol. I p. 318.

[318]See HB Merkelbach “Summa Theologiae Moralis”, Desclée de Brouwer, Brugis - Belgica, 1959, t. I, p. 694ss

[319]** "The moral norm of" Humanae vitae "
and the pastoral task ”L'Osservatore Romano, 16 February 1989, p. 1, www.vatican.va, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19890216_norma-morale_it.html

[320]M. Sales “The New Testament commented on by Fr. Marco Sales ”Edd. LICET and Marietti, Turin, 1914, v. II p. 165

[321]M. Sales “The New Testament commented on by Fr. Marco Sales ”Edd. LICET and Marietti, Turin, 1914, v. II p. 309

[322]See s. Ammonius, Letter 12: Patrologia Orientalis 10/6, 1973, 603-607

Back to Chapters