The censorship is mortification of ideas and as such should not be adopted under any circumstances, even if what we are about to read or listen could cause scandal.
Opening a reasoning in such a lapidary way is not the fruit of the Augustan heat, but the will to motivate with strength the following will be examined.
In recent days - it is not important when and perhaps not even where and who - a priest from northern Italy has called inappropriate, during the liturgical celebration for the feast of the Assumption (Ferragosto nda), that a part of the "Alpine Prayer ", The reasons given by the priest, for such an unusual censorship, are due to the fact that the sentence contained in the prayer could have hurt the susceptibility of the many migrants who in recent years are progressively settling, legitimately or not, in Italy.
For greater clarity we will go on to report the offending case:
"Make our weapons strong against anyone who threatens our homeland, our flag, our millennial Christian civilization".
Certainly for a mountain priest the phrase - make our weapons strong against anyone who threatens our homeland - must have appeared as a real scandal, who knows what upheavals the prelate himself would have suffered if in the seminary he had had time to read the whole Bible, instead of probably focusing only on the Onan passage; in fact, in the sacred text there are hundreds of invitations made by God to the People of Israel to mercilessly destroy their enemies, in short, the weapons used in self-defense of which the censored prayer in comparison is the stuff of sissies.
It remains clear that the censor priest should not even know the Regensburg speech made by Benedict XVI in 2006, where the Supreme Pontiff wondered if Muslims had among their intellectual and doctrinal resources arguments in favor of religious tolerance and the clear separation between the state. and faith, essential themes to appreciate how mutual understanding is a two-way theme and therefore it would be beyond any logic to demand it from only one of the dialoguing parties, always assuming that there is a dialogue.
In the will of the scissoring man of God there may also be reasons of political-ideological cosmopolitanism, so words like homeland, flag, and millennial Christian civilization would appear at least in antithesis with a certain ideology.
At this point, in order not to upset anyone and in order to definitively dismantle the unreasonableness of this censor in a cassock, it is necessary to highlight how the concept of national identity, as a starting factor for understanding the reasons for a "Great and Terrible" world, were well present in the thought of Antonio Gramsci.
The Marxian philosopher, although opposed by the fascist regime, never denied the concepts of a united Italy and the supremacy of the arts and national sciences, certainly these factors constituted for him, a man of the left, a premise to the cosmopolitan opening, but always and in any case an element inescapable and strongly to defend.
On the other side of thought one can think of Giovanni Gentile.
The Hegelian philosopher considered individualism and the egoism of the concept of liberal state a pernicious evil to be fought through the reasons of the individual integrated into the state understood as a total set of people, material and spiritual resources.
In short, identity is an essential element both from the right and from the left and the need for a dialogue that is not mere prostration of the other's reasons is fundamental for the doctrine of the Church, taking into account all this on what foundations it was decided to deny there Alpine Prayer?
The Islamic world considers our world a weak and incapable even to believe, in the eyes of Muslims the West has bastardized itself through deviant behavior that leads away from faith towards an effective abandonment of religion and in the direction of militant apostasy.
Granted that this is true, it would perhaps be understandable if it were determined by socio-economic phenomena such as consumerism and the capitalist system with infinite growth, but that apostasy is imposed through intellectually beautiful choices of a priest who does not even know catechism is unacceptable.
