What is happening before our eyes is perhaps an epochal change that affects one of the fundamental elements of Italian identity: Catholicism. The clerical hierarchies are wrong to think they can orient what remains of the "Catholic people" towards the shores of that progressive humanitarianism which represents the extreme outcome of the Second Vatican Council. In an even more radical sense, they are wrong to think that they still hold the "monopoly of the Sacred".
Whether they attend religious services or not, Italians remain steeped in Christianity in its values ​​and also in its unconscious reactions. What is now failing is loyalty to the Pope and his direct collaborators.
“Jesus was a migrant” say some priests with an ambiguous look. The vast majority of Italian Catholics do not believe in this extravagant theology and vote for Salvini. “Don't make a nativity scene if you don't want to welcome migrants” ... This is what they say referring to the robust illegal immigrants who land with a para-military dynamic on our coasts.
But in reality those who have always made the nativity scene will continue to do so even if they are in favor of re-doing the praiseworthy naval blockade that the Minister of the Interior Napolitano, with a Napoleonic attitude, imposed at the time of the Albanian crisis.
Comments are spreading online that recall Thomas Aquinas' sound and realistic doctrine on immigration., the main doctor of the Church. The cornerstones of this doctrine are clear and distinct: we welcome ourselves to the extent we can, without disturbing the existing social order; the guest adapts to the rules with all care and caution, to the habits and customs of the one who generously hosts for as long as the hospitality continues.
Paul's stance arose from the distinction posed by Christ between the political and the religious. He recommended that Christians integrate into society with full respect for rules and authority.. The position expressed in the Letter to the Romans is completely different from the caricature of "subversive Christianity" that Nietzsche himself had endorsed.
Paul urges respect for the laws of the Roman Empire and also recalls the importance of a civil authority exercising force guided by reason to maintain peace: “If you do evil then fear, because not in vain [the civil authority, n.d.R] bring the sword". Priests like Don Mazzi should be reminded of this when they embrace the worst criminals and insinuate that it would be unchristian to give a nice life sentence to bloodthirsty murderers. In reality the opposite is true: not correcting “with the sword” is anti-Christ, unless you want to correct the Apostle of the Gentiles with the Cleric of the Televisions.
Wanting to delve deeper into the social doctrine of Christianity, the one that flows from the living sources of the New Testament, we realize that this doctrine is very different from that sort of "ideological sharia" that possesses the minds of the most infatuated priests.
Let us first remember the "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's", the phrase pronounced by Christ which is the profound foundation of Western secularism and which establishes the autonomy of the "political". To religious nationalists, Christ reminded them of the need to respect Caesar's rules: thus theologically founded the autonomy of the political - and it is also useless to underline that one of the first concerns of every Caesar, that he is not a fool, and to control the territory and borders, to rigorously establish who enters as friends and who does not, even when it may only be potentially harmful.
Christ's expression "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's" cuts to the root of all fundamentalism. The clerics who would like to transform the universal reception of illegal immigrants into a law decree (identified in a very dubious way with the guest spoken of in the Gospels) in reality they do not realize that they are blaspheming God in his Christian specificity since they transform a religious precept into a civil law: in practice they invent a Christian Sharia.
There's no point in being surprised: after all they are the same ones who without any shame are saying that the Christian God (embodied in history and therefore representable) it is the same Allah as the Muslims (inexorable master of events who could never be invoked as "Father").
From Christianity comes a profound civil and social conscience: hospitals bear witness to this, the mountains of piety, orphanages, the homes for the elderly scattered throughout the Christian ecumene over two thousand years. On the other hand, transforming this social concern into a left-wing ideology represents a problematic caricature.
It is Christ himself who vetoes any attempt to transform Christianity into a social ideology: “My kingdom is not of this world” (phrase perfectly complementary to "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's") and above all "Man does not live by bread alone". Actually Islam, eminently juridical and political religion, it could lend itself much more to this secularized flattening of religion.
 
It is our historical thesis: the clerics of the Third Millennium tend to flatten Christianity into an abstract social monotheism, a sort of feel-good Sharia, which is fatally destined to kneel at the feet of the true Sharia, that of iron and blood of Islamic monotheism.
We Italians are called against this perspective, Today, to animate a European civil Christianity that does not forget the transcendent heights of our religion and at the same time is well aware of what was the true historical-social consequence of Christ's teaching.
Let us think of a Christianity not debased by clericalism, that exalts sacred art from Giotto onwards: the Word became flesh, therefore it can be depicted plastically unlike what Islam claims (and also Judaism). The Christianity of Saint Francis who celebrated the magnificence of Creation and preached the Crusade in the Holy Land. But also Dante's proud Christianity, who contested the Pope's interference in politics as an extreme form of simony.
Without forgetting the social Christianity of the monks who redeemed Europeans kidnapped by North African slavers, of the medieval Franciscans who founded the monti di pieta (and who today would be in the front row against the greedy and avaricious austerity of the European Union).
European Christianity will survive the crisis of garrulous clerics with rainbow scarves: it is something too important and essential. Spengler saw in the Gothic cathedrals the symbol of the Faustian energy of European man projected towards the infinite and celebrated in the icons of the Mother of God with Child the "solicitation towards the future", embodied by that tender and regal Child with sunny features.
Today perhaps a significant metamorphosis is underway and men of good will are called to make their contribution to ensure that it is accomplished.
(by Alfonso Piscitelli)
 
Source: https://www.oltrelalinea.news/2018/12/10/il-cristianesimo-non-e-una-sharia2/