The culture that enters our space of freedom is, according to the name itself, the culture of submission. Obedience forced upon us. A culture of Christian and European freedom meets with a culture of conquest aiming at our submission, to our enslavement. This is simply a extremist opposition to which any another ethnic, social, economical differences are secondary, tertiary and yet irrelevant. An crucial dispute is the conflict of freedom with the desire to enslave us, to surrender us to a completely abroad culture – says Fr.
Tomasz Kolanek, PCh24.pl: Reverend Priest Professor, is the devil the most outstanding theologian?
Prof. Paweł Bortkiewicz TChr: There is no uncertainty that this impression can be made. Just callback 2 passages of the Bible, where the devil acts like a theologian. The first passage is simply a scene from Paradise, erstwhile the devil asks an highly clever, very provocative, even superb question: “Did God truly say, Do not eat fruit from all the trees of this garden?” (Gen 3:1), and then erstwhile Eve answered him, “You will not die! But God knows that erstwhile you eat the fruit of this tree, your eyes will be opened, and as God knows good and evil" (Gen 3:4-5).
The devil's question was ambiguity. In addition, it was provocative adequate to make doubts in man, which turned into a distorted decision of freedom.
Even more the Devil revealed his theological dimension, even more he presented himself as a Bible student in the scene of Christ's temptation erstwhile he utilized the Scriptures:
“Then the devil took him to the Holy City, put him at the top of the corner of the temple, and said to him, “If you are the boy of God, throw yourself down, for it is written, “He will give his angels an order for you, and they will carry you on their hands, lest by chance you offend your ft by stone” (Mt 4:5-6). The Devil took out of context 1 conviction from the Bible to justify submission of God to Satan.
This scene clearly shows us that the Devil knows the Bible as small as anyone, but uses it in an instrumental, cynical, perverse way.
The Church has always encouraged reading the Bible, but not on its own. The Bible must be read according to and together with the Magisterium of the Church. If individual does otherwise, it could end up like Protestant heretics, right?
Definitely. Protesters are the best evidence that the freedom to interpret the Scriptures can lead to a extremist deformity of the image of the Lord God, God's Love, salvation and warping of the imagination of the Church and man.
The Church has for centuries warned against reading the Bible on her own. I will only callback here the words of the Apostle Paul, who in 1 letter stressed that Scripture is not for any explanation.
Apparently there was a tendency in the first Christian commune back then – 2000 years ago – to interpret the Scriptures according to their own measurement of reason, not according to the authority of the Church.
I asked about these 2 issues, due to the fact that present we are dealing with a flood of public space by fragments of the Holy Scripture torn from the context by people who hatred the Church; who called for the demolition of Catholic temples during the alleged black marches; who call the Blessed Sacrament a "toll" and who are disturbed by crosses and beating of church bells. These people instrumentally usage the Bible to hit Catholics in all subject – it is now a substance of accepting illegal immigrants. Why is this happening? Why are specified trends increasing? Why can’t we yet see the decisive consequence of the hierarchs to specified vile attacks?
You ask why this is happening. I don't know the answer to that question. I can only say that seemingly hatred of the Church, hatred of Catholics, anti-Christian confusion has taken distant any of the ability to think logically. possibly these people have let themselves be told that Christ's teaching is evil, and so they will not go back from anything to “kill” the Church, humiliate Catholics, offend clergymen, etc.
Here we are dealing with any terrible paradox that people who reject God, mock the Church, mock the authority of the Holy Scriptures at any point scope for the Bible to rip out its passages from the context and usage them as sticks to attack Catholics. It was about specified people that Onufry Zagłoba in Henryk Sienkiewicz's “Trilogy” utilized to say “He was a devil dressed in an ornate and the tail on the Mass was ringing.”
This is simply a perfidious form of manipulation, which – as you rightly pointed out – does not meet a firm consequence from us, Catholics, or even more bishops of the Catholic Church. We must remember that the Bible is our Holy Book, and so manipulating God’s Word cannot be treated as the people we have described above. God’s Word is Holy! The Word of God has its meaning, has its importance, has its hermeneutics, which clearly and precisely defines primarily the explanation of the Word of God, places them in context, etc. This is all to be remembered and kept in mind.
We Catholics are prohibited from speaking harshly about the “value” of the leftist side. We Catholics are criticized for any harsh words and stronger words. At the same time, we Catholics let the enemies of the Church to mock God’s Word. And they are very eager to do so – in a cynical and perverse way they scope for God's Word to justify these thesis completely not God.
Let me be honest, Professor, that virtually blood is flooding me, as I hear people talking about erstwhile they talk about it, write, etc., that “Jesus was a exile too”. That's enough! The same people compose an open text that if present the Holy household tried to “enter” Poland, “millions of Polish Catholics” would request that “they be shot”...
These people are doing this on purpose, on purpose, and deliberately, to provoke us, to annoy us and to warm up even more intense social emotions.
I'll answer as quietly as I can. Poles would not shoot refugees, as evidenced by the last 2 years erstwhile we faced a immense wave of real Ukrainian refugees. Of course, from Ukraine to Poland besides immigrants came to Poland, deserters and many people who left their country not necessarily due to the war. However, most of us have been dealing with refugees. What? Poles, seeing that real war refugees were coming to our homeland, were able to show them cultural openness, economical openness, etc. We were able to share national wealth. We were able to share the space of our homes. We were able to virtually share bread and something for that bread. We were able to share with the Ukrainians despite the divisions that existed and inactive be between us.
One thing was crucial here: we have a common culture with the Ukrainians. Despite many differences, we have a cultural core. Despite the many abuses that have always occurred in the human world, many Ukrainians have responded to our hospitality with gratitude. Of course, there have been any pathologies, but unfortunately, that is human nature. Not everyone is perfect, not everyone can afford gratitude. The Ukrainians showed that they can assimilate. They do any work, which shows that they have not only rights but responsibilities. This symmetry of rights and obligations is highly important.
But in the situation of the alleged refugees we are talking about present in a political dimension... Refugees don't know where they came from, they don't know why... Refugees whose only common denominator is the concept of ‘illegal’ – no of the above elements is fulfilled in relation to these people.
No cultural community is fulfilled, the anticipation of symmetry of rights and obligations is fulfilled. There is no way that claims are accompanied by attempts to impose duties. This is absolutely incomparable.
Christ the Lord, who had suffered forced migration as a consequence of persecution into Egypt with his Family, took his life in the land of Egypt. We do not know precisely what it looked like, but it was surely not a claim attitude. First of all, Christ, along with Mary and Joseph, returned to his household home in a situation where conditions were appropriate.
There is no, absolutely no analogy between this biblical image and those pictures that are drawn by modern ideologists.
The another side will answer the above argument of the prof. as follows: this is all due to the fact that Ukrainians are white and refugees are either Negroes or Arabs...
Ukrainians are white, that's a fact. delight note, however, that there are besides any differences in relation to them, and these are crucial differences that are thorns or ferocious ones associated with our hard history. Yet we were and we are able to overcome it.
I have late read an article by Chantal Delsol, in which it clearly stated that Europeans as Europeans are not racists. We don't head if someone's 1 or the another race. We are disturbed and will be disturbed by the aggressiveness and extremist alienity of a culture that has peculiar features.
In short, this culture that enters our space of freedom is, according to the name itself, a culture of submission. Obedience forced upon us.
So there is simply a culture of Christian and European freedom with a culture of conquest aiming at our submission, our enslavement. This is simply a extremist opposition to which any another ethnic, social, economical differences are secondary, tertiary and yet irrelevant. A major dispute is the conflict of freedom with the desire to enslave us, to surrender us to a completely alien culture.
At this point, the another side would answer to the professor, that Pope Francis added the call to the Litania Loretańska “The Comfort of Migrants, Pray for Us”... How can we so talk of a abroad culture erstwhile Our woman is simply a “comfort” for these people?
I am a associate of a spiritual assembly that works among Polish expatriates and Poles surviving in different countries. any of them left of their own accord, any of them were abandoned by the Polish state as a consequence of post-war border changes, any of them received a "wild ticket" from the communists etc. Comfort for migrants alone is most desirable.
However, it should be noted that these people we are talking about are simply defined as "illegal refugees", "illegal immigrants". It's not a question of migration. This is simply a substance of a very circumstantial group of movements, which has 2 features: legal illegality and extremist alienity from the cultural side. The alienity of cultural warfare.
Here is no solution to comfort these people. Here we would gotta formulate a call for "The Comfort of Migrants" alongside the call for "The suspect against Illegal Refugees".
I full agree with the Professor's Book. I suspect, however, that specified a call will not be added to the Loretian Litania, due to the fact that Francis, erstwhile adding the call "The Comfort of Migrants", surely did not mean, for example, migrants from Poland, but illegal migrants.
It is simply a pity that Francis not only in this case refers to his predecessors, e.g. to St John Paul II, who wrote in his endorsement “Ecclesia in Europe” in point 101 about the migration crisis. This paper was released on June 28, 2003 – more than 10 years before Angela Merkel announced the slogan "Herzlich Willkommen".
In this document, the Pope pointed out the duties of a culture of hospitality. The very work of hospitality is due to the request of the human heart.
At the same time, the pope made it very clear that it was the work of the governments of individual countries, guided by the prudent concern for the common welfare of the communities entrusted to themselves, to regulate the migration movements that may be expressed as a consequence of refusing entry. Migrant has the right to move, but that does not mean that all country, all community, has the work to accept this migrant.
If a migrant threatens the safety of the community, we are committed to protecting the safety of our own home, our own family, our own national community.
It is good that Francis undertakes teaching clearly and precisely expressed by 1 of his predecessors.
Again, Priest Professor, I will callback the argument of the liberal left and another enemies of the Church. They would teardrop their robes at this place and find that Poles besides rape, steal, besides murder, are criminals, gangsters, etc. Recently, on social media, we have been dealing with any unusual delight by these people in the news that somewhere in the West the court convicted a Pole who committed a crime of rape or murder. They wrote that the dark home is afraid of migrants, and Poles themselves are specified and so evil...
In the case of Poles described by you, events are pathology radically denying our culture. A pathology to burn with hot iron.
In the case of Islamists, in turn, these are the characteristics in their culture, and here lies a extremist difference. Pursuit of submission, specified as not different treatment of the “unbelievers”, the rule of the Tekiyja, the rule of ketman, attitude to women etc. – these are not elements that have been isolated from Islam. They form an integral part of it.
In the case of representatives of Western culture, Christian culture in this Poles we are talking about utmost pathology worthy of condemnation and most severe punishment. In the case of the culture of Islam, however, we are dealing with a standard of conduct and that is frightening.
We are called upon to show false mercy' - we are to accept and aid illegal immigrants at all costs. It doesn't substance where they come from or who they are. The crucial thing is that we're bad people too, and we gotta pay for it. What, however, should real, real mercy on our part for illegal immigrants look like?
We are bound by the order of love, and so above all by the love of our own community, starting with the household community.
Notice that the Commandment of Love of Closeness says plainly, "Love your neighbour as yourself." This is simply a very realistic, very circumstantial mention point for us. We must love ourselves well - understood love. We must love our families, our people, with this love. Of course, as far as possible, man can extend this heart further, but in specified a way that he will not endanger the good that is the prime object of my love. It means that I can share my home, but I have no work to give this home to strangers, to be expelled from it and become homeless myself.
Love is rational. Love is not an emotion guided by any ideology. Love is authentic. The purest love is the love of kindness and goodwill, but this good will must be based on understanding.
Often, the discussion about immigrants evokes the image of a merciful Samaritan. He truly responds in need, but note that the injured wanderer he transmits to the institution that was the inn.
The inn in this parable was not a random place. It wasn't just a restaurant. In those days, the inn besides served as a care facility. In the inn, you could treat the wounds, sleep over, etc. It was an institution.
The Merciful Samaritan does not take an injured wanderer to his home, he is not permanently associated with it. Yes, he gives him circumstantial help, assigns a certain amount of money, but directs the injured to an organized institution. This is simply a very rational and deliberate action, not chaotic and based solely on emotions.
Learn from the merciful Samaritan.
God bless the conversation.
Tomasz D. Kolanek
