By Marco Bongi
“We will find ourselves more and more faced with
someone who professes to speak to us in the name of God by telling us that we
have no need of Him.”
I listened to these dreadful words spoken by
Alessandro Gnocchi on the 8th March 2014 at the annual meeting of Civitella del
Tronto. The title of Gnocchi’s
presentation was: “The Crisis of the Sacred and the Church kneeling before the
World.”
At first reading this seems to be a provocative
statement and a bit over the top.
However I have reflected on it for some time - not as
a theologian which I am not - but as a simple layman who observes what is
happening around him.
Now I have arrived at the conclusion that these are,
indeed, “prophetic words” an expression which will make those who are
[especially] fond of it in the wrong way very happy!
Here then are some simple thoughts on the matter:
1) In the final analysis, what is the religious
liberty expressed in the concilar document Dignitatis Humanae? In the years
following the document, the diplomacy of the Holy See didn’t do very much, in
the name of the Council (and thus
God) about the demand to
remove every reference to the religion
of the State from the constitution, did they? In other words, it (The Holy See)
was asked to declare in the name of God that God is not important.
2) Didn’t the same thing happen with ecumenism? In the
name of God they forced us to believe that, fundamentally the differences among
the various Christian religions and non-Christian ones too, are - all things
considered - negligible i.e. whether God is present in the Eucharist or not,
whether Christ is the Son of God Incarnate or not, whether “without Faith it is
impossible to please God” or not – these
things are not important. So God Himself
ultimately, is not important to them.
3) And the question of the Mass of Ages? If you think
about it a bit, the innovators hate it because it attributes too much
importance to God and to the transcendent dimension of [our] relationship with
Him. In the name of God, they oblige us instead, to give importance to man, the
assembly and “the supper in the community”…
4) The harshness and intransigence which admits no
discussion that the modern pastors hurl at every supposition of “ a war”
started in the name of Religion is also shocking: to wage war in defense of God is blasphemy,
an inexcusable crime. Much more understandable instead, are the people’s
revolts i.e. the occupation of factories and the so-called wars of
liberation. What does it mean? It’s
obvious. God is not important, there is no sense in fighting to defend Him and,
if you haven’t understood this [yet], we order you to understand it in the name
of God Himself!
5) There would be many more examples, but looking at
the near future, I would like briefly to mention the possible and probable,
re-admission of the divorced and remarried to the sacraments. We will certainly
have to accept it, in the name of God’s authority, even if God has clearly
said: “What God has joined together, let no man put asunder.” Moral: the law of
God is not important, you must believe this in the name of God Himself!
6) And the praxis, (or what they like calling “the
pastoral”), follows the new theology faithfully. What does it mean?: imposing, de facto,
Communion in the hand, impeding, de facto,
genuflections (since the kneelers
have been taken away) expelling, de facto, sin, the last things, the
objectivity of morality from catechesis as well as homiletics?
This is why, in my view, Alessandro’s statement is
truly prophetic, in the most authentic sense of this expression.
The final questions are consequently inevitable, even
if they appear provocative:
Can the ecclesiastical authorities teach such things?
Is it part of their legitimate powers? Do the faithful have the duty to obey
such orders?
And, ultimately:
Will God accept being put to the side like a useless
toy for much longer?
