Lubich versus Dante - Jesus or Satan in Hell?

L'Enfer, Alberto Zardo

Eternal Crucifixion? But wasn't the crucifixion once and for all, while the Resurrection is eternal? According to Chiara Lubich, who, according her most fanatical followers including bishops, cardinals and theologians should be declared a Doctor of the Church, the answer is "No!" 

Without doubt, he most famous description of Hell is that of Dante in his Divine Comedy (the second, perhaps that of Milton in Paradise Lost). This how, in his Inferno, Dante describes Satan:

"The Emperor of the kingdom dolorous

  From his mid-breast forth issued from the ice;
  And better with a giant I compare

Than do the giants with those arms of his;
  Consider now how great must be that whole,
  Which unto such a part conforms itself.

Were he as fair once, as he now is foul,
  And lifted up his brow against his Maker,
  Well may proceed from him all tribulation."

From The Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri, translated by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. 
Therefore, according to Dante, Satan is a frozen giant, eternally imprisoned at the lowest point of Hell. But hang on a second, in her 'visions' she called 'Paradise of '49' the self-styled visionary Chiara Lubich claims to have seen in her 'Inferno', not Satan but Christ Crucified as a giant frozen and immobilized for all eternity:

"On this side of Paradise, Hell will remain. A great J.F. (Jesus Forsaken) suspended and dead and empty and cold and hard. It will remain like matter without life (…) even J.F., who became Hell to give us Paradise, believed himself at that moment to be without purpose in life and death, deluded, a failure”. (…) (p.18)

“Between heaven and hell there will be perfect unity and this through Jesus Forsaken. He made sin was made nothing. In Him nothing is so united with everything: God (…) that is, nothing becomes everything: Jesus Forsaken is God, Jesus-sin is God, Jesus-nothing is God, Jesus-Hell is God. Therefore the Father wherever he sees nothing sees J.F. : that is, he sees himself: God and therefore everywhere he sees Heaven (p.20)

If we see Hell with the eye of God we do not see it. God cannot see non-being, or rather he sees it in its nothingness, in its true being of non-being. He, God, sees Jesus Forsaken down there and that is Jesus-sin or Jesus-Hell. But Jesus Forsaken is always God. Therefore God in hell sees himself, the Word... 

Here is the unity of the Afterlife: All God, all Heaven, all Jesus. And Hell will be for God (listen how beautiful!) the perennial cry of Jesus Forsaken, the cry of Jesus Forsaken will be eternalized. And that is, for God, Hell will be the greatest love; the love of loves, unity, God, the new song”. (p.41)

[From 107 pages of  "Chiara Lubich's Comments on her pages of Paradiso 49" for the European Zone Leaders, 1974, translation by the author - numerical references to pages of 'Paradise '49']

For decades, the text of the 'Paradise of '49' was kept secret by the Focolare movement's leaders because it was feared that the Church would use it as a reason to suppress the entire movement. Now it seems that all they want to do is flaunt it as publicly as possible. Although in the perspective of the Catholic Church, Lubich's 'visions' are private revelations that can make no claim to being believed by anyone, even by the focolarini themselves, within the movement they are practically sacred scripture.  Since Lubich's death, her visions have been increasingly promoted by the Focolare Movement, in a flood of books, articles and videos, culminating in a recent (February 2021) statement by newly re-elected co-president Jesus Moran brazenly claining that Chiara Lubich's 'visions' are not private revelations:

"It must be said that Chiara has always thought and transmitted to us... that this mystical experience is the essence of the mentality of anyone who wants to be a source of unity today in the Church and in society - and also of those who accept the charism of the Movement. Therefore, Chiara's experience is not private or particular."

http://www.settimananews.it/ministeri-carismi/focolari-dopo-assemblea-gen



In Lubich's musings on Hell, we find a doctrine very distant from what already exists in scripture and the Fathers of the Church.

It must be remembered that Lubich was what we call in English 'a glutton for punishment', she had a taste for suffering that does not appear normal. Even Jesus prayed let this cup pass me by. But for Chiara Lubich, it is rather a case of 'It's never enough'; is it possible that her personal neuroses influenced her 'vision'?

The Creed includes the phrase 'He descended into hell', but this is interpreted in the New Testament and by the Fathers of the Church as a moment of passage. But how does one reconcile this idea of ​​a Christ who is eternally 'Sin' and 'Hell' with the words of St. Paul: 'Christ, once resurrected from the dead, can no longer die. Death no longer has dominion over him. By the death he suffered, he died to sin, and the life he lives, he lives in God.' (Rom., 6: 9-11)

According to a secret document of the movement, "From this interpretation, according to Chiara, will be born - a new doctrine, a new theology, a new philosophy." Of this there is no doubt. But the fundamental question is: can this new doctrine claim to be orthodox?'

Lubich contro Dante: Satana o Gesu nell'Inferno?

L'Enfer, Alberto Zardo

Crocefisione Eterna? Ma la crocefessione non era una volta per sempre mentre la Risurrezione e eterna? Secondo la teologia di Chiara Lubich, invece, che da alcuni/e dei suoi seguaci piu fanatici, compreso vescovi, cardinali e teologi, dovrebbe essere dichiarata Dottore della Chiesa, la risposta e "No!"

Il piu famoso descrizione dell'Inferno e sicuramente quello di Dante nel suo Divina Comedia (la seconda sarebbe probabilmente quello di Milton nel Paradiso Perduto): cosi descrive il Diavolo:

 

“Lo ’mperador del doloroso regno

da mezzo ’l petto uscia fuor de la ghiaccia;

e più con un gigante io mi convegno,

che i giganti non fan con le sue braccia:

vedi oggimai quant’esser dee quel tutto

ch’a così fatta parte si confaccia.

S’el fu sì bel com’elli è ora brutto…”

(Dante Alighieri, La Divina Commedia: Inferno  Canto XXXIV 28-34)

Perciò, secondo Dante, Satana e un gigante ghiacciato, prigioniero eterno al punto piu basso dell'Inferno. Ma, aspetta un attimo: nelle sue 'visioni' conosciute come 'Paradiso di '49' la sedicente visionaria Chiara Lubich pretende di aver visto nel suo 'Inferno', non Satana ma Cristo Crocefisso, anche Lui come un gigante ghiacciato e immobilizato per tutta l'eternita:

“Al di qua del Paradiso rimarrà l’Inferno. Un grande G.A. (Gesu Abbandonato) sospeso e morto e  vuoto e freddo e duro. Rimarrà come la materia senza la vita (…) anche G.A.  fattosi Inferno per donare a noi il Paradiso si credette in quel momento senza  scopo nella vita e nella morte, illuso, fallito”. (…) (p.18)  

“Tra paradiso e inferno si sarà perfetta unità e ciò per mezzo di Gesù  Abbandonato. Egli fatto peccato fu fatto nulla. In Lui il nulla è tanto unito al  tutto: Dio (…) cioè il nulla diventa tutto: Gesù Abbandonato è Dio, Gesù  peccato è Dio, Gesù nulla è Dio, Gesù Inferno è Dio. Dunque il Padre  dovunque vede un nulla vede G:A: cioè vede sé stesso: Dio e quindi dovunque  vede Paradiso (p.20) 

Se noi vediamo l’Inferno con l’occhio di Dio non lo vediamo. Dio non può vedere  il non essere, o meglio lo vede nella sua nullità, nel suo vero essere di non essere.  Egli, Iddio, vede laggiù Gesù Abbandonato e cioè Gesù-Peccato o Gesù-Inferno.  Ma Gesù Abbandonato è sempre Dio. Per cui Dio all’inferno vede sé stesso, il Verbo. Vede il Paradiso per cui è tutto Paradiso...

Ecco fatta l’unità dell’Aldilà: Tutto Dio, tutto Paradiso, tutto Gesù. E l’inferno  sarà per Iddio (senti che bello!) il perenne grido di Gesù Abbandonato, sarà  eternizzato il grido di Abbandonato. E cioè per Iddio l’Inferno sarà il più  grande amore; l’amore degli amori, Gesù l’unità, Dio, il cantico nuovo”. (p.41) 

Da 107 pagine del 1974 "Commenti di Chiara Lubich alle sue pagine del Paradiso 49" per i CapiZona europei 

Per decenni, il testo del 'Paradiso di '49' e stato tenuto segreto perche si temeva che la Chiesa avrebbe bocciato il movimento a causa di queste affermazioni (e tante altre). Oggi sembra che i focolarini non vogliono fare altro che sbandierarle al mondo intero. Anche se nelle prospettive della Chiesa cattolica, le 'visioni' di Lubich sono rivelazioni private che non hanno nessuno pregio di essere creduti dai fedeli cattolici - e neanche dai focolarini stessi - dentro il movimento sono praticamente sacra scrittura.

Dopo la morte della Lubich, le sue visioni sono state promosse con sempre più forza dal Movimento dei Focolari, in un fiume di libri, articoli e video, culminati in una recente (febbraio 2021) affermazione del neo ri-eletto co-presidente Jesus Moran che le rivelazioni di Chiara Lubich non sono rivelazioni private:

"Bisogna dire che Chiara ha sempre pensato e ci ha trasmesso... che questa esperienza mistica è l'essenza della mentalità di chiunque voglia essere fonte di unità oggi nella Chiesa e nella società - e anche di chi accetta il carisma del Movimento.  Perciò l'esperienza di Chiara non è privata o particolare". 

http://www.settimananews.it/ministeri-carismi/focolari-dopo-assemblea-gen

In questa messa in scena di Gesu Crocefisso eternamante nell'Inferno c'e una dottrina molto distante da quello che esiste nella scrittura e i Padri della Chiesa.

Bisogna ricordare che la Lubich era un tipo che chiamiamo in inglese 'glutton for punishment' (ghiottona di punizione), aveva un gusto per la sofferenza che non appare normale. Perfino Gesu ha pregato, 'Lascia che questo calice mi manchi.' Ma per Chiara Lubich, e piuttosto un caso di 'non ne ho mai abbastanza'; puo essere che questa nevrosi personale influenza le 'visioni'.

Il Credo include la frase 'discese agli inferi', ma questo e interpratato nel Nuovo Testamento e i Padri della Chiesa come un momento di passaggio, quando Gesu libera dall'Inferno le persone buone nate prima della Sua venuta. Ma come si riconcilia questa idea di un Cristo eternamente 'Peccato' e 'Inferno' con le parole di San Paolo: 'Cristo una volta risuiscitato dalla morte non puo piu morire. La morte non ha piu dominio su di lui. Attraverso la morte che ha subito, e morto al peccato, e la vita che vive, la vive in Dio' (Rom., 6: 9-11)?

Secondo un documento segreto del movimento, "Da questa  interpretazione, nascerà, secondo Chiara, una nuova dottrina, una nuova teologia, una  nuova filosofia." Di questo non c'e dubbio. Ma la domanda piu fondamentale e: questa nuova dottrina e ortodossa?

Can there be love without empathy?

'Hierarchies have a famously damaging effect on empathy, where people at the top tend to lose their empathic abilities (even if their trait empathy was high when they came into the hierarchy) while people at the bottom often need to develop hyper-empathy as a kind of counterbalance (and to keep themselves safe).' *

I recently discovered this statement on the website of Psychology Today.  Having written extensively on the rigid monolithic hierarchy within Catholic movements and in particular, the Focolare Movement, it certainly confirmed my findings. Emotions are considered highly suspect within the Focolare culture - they are seen as deceptive, as 'attachments' and therefore in the 'bad zone' of Focolare's dualistic Manichean world view. They are 'human' rather than 'supernatural', bearing in mind that for Focolare foundress, Chiara Lubich, 'human' was - bizzarely - a negative term, signifying 'worldly'.

Even when I was a full-time member of Focolare (1967-76), I was often shocked by the harsh manner in which people were cancelled or dumped by the movement in a peremptory manner - especially by those in authority. People were judged starkly in terms of how useful they were to the movement - even people who had contributed generously in time, effort and materially - goods, services,money.  From its origins, Focolare 'cultivated' (this word is used internally to denote  recruitment) wealthy people. Even those in the UK who had provided the movement with the free use for many years of valuable properties in Central London, for example, were criticised for not giving more.

Those who left the movement were written off even more harshly. When Trudi, the former leader (capozona) of the female section of the Focolare movement in Germany, left the movement to marry in the early 1970s, her replacement, Bruna Tommasi, (one of Chiara Lubich's so-called 'first companions' - tiny but of fearsome appearance), told a German member, 'We cannot mention her name because she has betrayed God.'  I experienced this personally when, after I had left the movement, but responding to their invitation, I attended the presentation of the Templeton Award for Progress in Religion to Lubich by the Duke of Edinburgh, at the Guildhall in London in 1977.  When, after the ceremony, I approached another of Lubich's 'first companions', who I had known for many years, Doriana Zamboni, (sugary-sweet in appearance but tough as old boots in character), I understood for the first time what the phrase 'she looked straight through me' actually means. When I greeted her out of politeness, it was as though I was invisible, as her eyes worked the room for someone 'useful'.  I left the event in a state of shock.  In my career, I have worked with many important people, some world-famous in the arts and entertainment fields, but I have never encountered such bad manners as on that occasion.

The stated aim of the Focolare movement is love of others.  Yet how can there by love without empathy? As a Catholic, I would propose that empathy is a God-given gift which encourages us to love others because that is what we are created to do, it is essential to being human.  But showing spontaneous emotion does not compute with the kind of love Chiara Lubich and Focolare preach.  Before Lubich's funeral, her longtime secretary/promoter, Giulia (Eli) Folonari, ordered that there should be no tears at the funeral (broadcast live on Italian television station RAIUNO) to prove that the members of the movement believed she was in Heaven so there was nothing to cry about.  Yet Jesus wept over the death of his friend Lazarus. (See: https://popesarmada25.blogspot.com/p/out-of-past-i-archives-of-25-years.html) In the nine years I spent in the Focolare movement, I never heard the word 'compassion' (= to feel with) used by a member or leader of the movement.  Yet Saint Paul says, 'Rejoice with those who rejoice; weep with those who weep.'  And Pope Francis frequently uses the term 'tenderness' to express the nature of Christian love, emphasising its humanity, and its connection to the emotions.

When I was at Warwick University  in the 1960s, I remember a maths lecturer, an Anglican, referring to Mormonism as a 'homespun' religion.  I think this is an accurate description of Focolare, many of whose interpretations of the New Testament which are fundamental to the way members are expected to live out their everyday lives are grossly over-simplified and mistaken.  One example is their interpretation of Jesus' statement, when he speaks of kindness to others, that, 'in so far as you did this to one of the least of these brothers or sisters of mine, you did it to me.' (Matt. 25:40)  Chiara Lubich's interpretation is that 'we should see Jesus in others' (her phrase, not the gospel's), i.e. we should project an image of Christ on to others and that should motivate us to be kind and generous.  There are two problems here.  The first is that this - like many other aspects of Lubich's interpretations of the gospel - is a mechanistic, Pelagian approach - going though the motions without any inspiration from God's grace (a subject Pope Francis has frequently addressed, particularly in the document Gaudete et Exsultate, 2018).  This approach, Pelagianism, named after its British proponent Pelagius, was condemned by the Church as a heresy in the Sixth century because it implies that simply by doing the 'right things', going through the motions, we can save ourselves without any help from God. Secondly, 'seeing Jesus in others' eliminates completely the concept of empathy and even reduces the value and individuality of every human being in herself or himself: they are only worth loving if you 'see Jesus in them'. This is an insult to God's creation. According to Lubich, what is important is doing things for the 'right' reason, humanity and empathy play no part in this interpretation of the gospel teachings. 

The hyper-empathy referred to in the final sentence of the quotation at the beginning of the article, refers to the total subservience of those at the bottom of the hierarchy, necessary 'as a counterbalance and to keep themselves safe', another feature which was very evident in the blind obedience required of the underlings, which in Focolare is called 'making unity'.

*Psychology Today,

Karla McLaren M.Ed.

July 24 2024