Theologians & Scholars Formally Request Correction of Amoris Laetitia

Mathew

19 When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went into the region of Judea to the other side of the Jordan. 2 Large crowds followed him, and he healed them there.

3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”

4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

7 “Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”

8 Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

10 The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.”

11 Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12 For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

 

Brian, if you could desist from making other people's points - a great length - and make a couple of points of your own it might help matters. The same goes for the tiresome screeds copied and pasted by your sidekick.

Lets take one of the rare conclusions that you have at least tried to extrapolate and present as your own. Having finally conceded that historically no Pope has ever taught heresy you continue to insist that it could happen in the future. I have actually addressed this already and pointed out that you contradict yourself.

How have you contradicted yourself? You say that any Pope who taught heresy would be ipse facto not a Pope. Therefore the historical record would not be broken - no pope would have taught heresy. This is one example why I do not waste my time unthreading your particular brands of brainless ranting and silliness. (All words that you find acceptable Brian)

I have just come from confession and mass and the readings made me think of you guys. I am truly scandalised that a forum that claims the Mother of God as patron persists in encouraging some members to slander her Son's principle representative on earth and to put words into his mouth that were never spoken or meant in the way presented. I am not interested in scoring points, just speaking up for Holy Mother Church and our Blessed Mother.

I am as certain as I can be that Mary is displeased and offended with the treatment the pope receives from Padraig and Brian and Mac and a few of the others here. I do not go looking for the insults She suffers in the assaults on the pope. But If I see them I am duty bound to come to Her defence even if my ability in this is limited. If you don't like me use the ignore button.

I have been called a tiresome conversation stopper here. Some conversations should be stopped. Of course its Padraig's call ultimately who stays but in my experience that call is not made equitably - the rules of posting apply to some in ways they do not apply to others.

In my anger I admit I have occasionally wish heavenly retribution on your sorry butts but tonight I laughed. The very mercy of God that is dismissed here as mere pastoral lip service when preached by the Pope is shown in the sparing of the city for the sake of 5 good men.

The reverse is happening here - the few "bad" men are putting the entire forum in danger. I wonder if their contributions will outweigh the good the rest of us try to bring. Perhaps God will call time on the forum. As has been said already , more than a few good men and women have already walked away in disgust.

Maybe it was partly ego but I was hoping to bring a halt to the abuse Our Holy Father suffers here. I see that so far I have failed miserably. I may even have done some harm to this cause and for that I ask God's forgiveness. There have been worse hotheads than me who have become saints with God's grace.

 

no comment from me. go in peace.

 

I've had to pull back from commenting here because of the level of abuse that was being hurled at certain members of the hierarchy but I have continued to read your posts, Joe. There are not many defenders of Pope Francis still prepared to enter this lion's den so well done for your faithfulness.

Your post here is one of your better ones. You have accurately presented the most important points about this whole debate around Pope Francis. In particular, the point about RESPECT is so very important. The disrespect shown to Pope Francis and to the hierarchy who support him is totally inappropriate on a forum that presents itself as a Catholic forum.

As you point out, Brian has finally conceded that no Pope has taught heresy and yet we are supposed to 'explain' and 'justify' the Pope's teaching and guidance. No we are not. What we are called to do is to listen to him and to try to understand his teaching. Some of us have no difficulty doing this, others seem to struggle. Those who struggle should seek to understand through prayer, but instead they choose to criticize. That is their mistake.

 

View attachment 5174

 

I am still struggling to understand how the re-married and co-habitating should ever receive the Blessed Sacrament. I have yet to see one good answer.

 

That might assist form readers/lurkers in their assessment of the relative merits of each side of the debate.

If Joe has done anything more than this, if he has actually addressed for instance how adulterers and fornicators should be permitted to receive the Holy Eucharist (and it is beyond obvious this is the pope's intention in allowing those in irregular unions access to the Eucharist, so protestations to the contrary just are NOT credible but wishful thinking) I haven't seen it.

 

There have been lots of emotion laden appeals to situation ethics, but no attempt to square this with Christ's plain words in Scripture.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...04974a-3d55-11e6-a66f-aa6c1883b6b1_story.html
The pope’s welcome surprises

THREE YEARS ago, Pope Francis charted a new course in compassion for the Roman Catholic Church when, in response to a question about gay priests, he asked, “Who am I to judge?” This week, “I” became “we.”

“The question is: If a person who has that condition, who has goodwill, and who looks for God, who are we to judge?” Francis said in an airplane news conference Sunday. The pope’s choice to switch from the singular to the plural was promising in itself. But Francis went further. “I think the church must not only apologize . . . to a gay person it offended, but we must apologize to the poor, to women who have been exploited, to children forced into labor,” he said.

Empathy for the oppressed has always been a hallmark of Francis’s papacy. In this case, the pontiff has acknowledged that, at times, the church has been and can still be the oppressor — whether by discriminating against gay people, treating women in its ranks as second-class citizens or preaching clerical celibacy while protecting child abusers in the priesthood. His comments show a long-overdue willingness on the part of the church to grapple with its troubled past and to try to do better in the present.

Of course, doing better will require more than just words. At synods and other church gatherings, Francis has forced conversations on contested issues the Catholic Church had been dodging for decades — from homosexuality to divorce to contraception. But he has not developed doctrine that would change the status quo. Even an initiative to try bishops who sheltered pedophile priests in a Vatican tribunal has stalled — though Francis announced last month in an apostolic letter that those officials should be removed from office.

The church has a long way to go, and Francis is responsible for getting it there. But already he has offered more to the gay community than has ever been offered before. Certainly, Francis has split sharply from his predecessor, who as a cardinal called homosexuality an “intrinsic moral evil.” And words alone can force at least some change: Pope John Paul II, for example, is credited with helping inspire the Polish people to shake off Soviet control. Francis’s rhetoric could inspire Catholics around the world to change their own communities.

In his closing address at the 2014 Synod of the Family, Francis urged church traditionalists to open themselves to a “God of surprises.” The surprises the pope has given us so far have been more than welcome.

 

http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Blog/4897/the_washington_post_explains_pope_francis_to_us.aspx
The Washington Post "explains" Pope Francis to us

Pope Francis arrives to lead his general audience in St. Peter's Square at the Vatican in this May 11 file photo. (CNS photo/Paul Haring)

On July 2, 2016, the Washington Post carried an interesting Editorial entitled, “The Pope’s Welcome Surprises”. The Editorial is short and can be read in a few minutes, and what follows presupposes acquaintance with the Post Editorial itself. That this Editorial is written is not a particularly great “surprise”. It reveals, in my opinion, just how responsible non-Catholic observers understand what the Holy Father has been saying and doing. Whether they have him exactly right can and should be debated.

What follows here is one man’s “reading” or “re-reading” of what is said and implied in this Post Editorial. This “re-reading” and “re-writing” is not a parody or a critique of what the Post wrote or what the Holy Father may hold. It is putting in my own words what can fairly be taken to be what at least some of the public hear the Pope saying. Others may see it differently, but I think what follows comes close to what is implied in the Editorial:

“The Pope Surprises the World”

Under Pope Francis, the Catholic Church now, in principle, accepts the liberal/humanist concepts of modern morality and justice. This view emphasizes state authority (positive law), unlimited moral freedom, theoretic relativism, and universal tolerance.
Francis has not yet formally managed infallibly to install these principles--such as the feasible goodness of divorce, the gay life, abortion, and the denial of any dogmatism or rigidity. He is a severe critic of inequality in all forms, a champion of the downtrodden. He approves ecology’s concern with earth’s dwindling resources. He is systematically working his way through these issues and will, no doubt, soon define these concepts in formal ecclesial terms.

This ‘Francis’ revolution in the Catholic Church is unexpected but welcome. It is long overdue. The old order of doctrine, tradition, and unchangeable moral principles can gradually be set aside. This new freedom and scientific understanding of the Catholic Church are what we now witness in the memorable words of this Argentine pope. They come from the last place from whence we might expect the long-awaited modernization of this venerable but stubborn institution.

Again, this is how one man reads the minds that composed the Post’s Editorial. I take it to be a fair interpretation. As such Editorials on the intentions of Pope Francis multiply in the world press, it seems to be up to the Holy Father to clarify himself for the benefit of everyone. Because of the high profile of this Post Editorial, I do not think ‘the Vatican’ bureaucracy can any longer perform this clarifying task. In this sense, the Editorial is welcome as a basis of deep reflection about the nature of the Church.


About the Author

James V. Schall, S.J.

James V. Schall, S.J. taught political philosophy at Georgetown University for many years until recently retiring. He is the author of numerous books and countless essays on philosophy, theology, education, morality, and other topics. His most recent book is Reasonable Pleasures: The Strange Coherences of Catholicism (Ignatius Press). Visit his site, "Another Sort of Learning", for more about his writings and work.

 

Then firstly, stop reading the poison being endlessly posted on this forum against the Holy Father.

Secondly, try to humbly trust in the Lord who has given us a truly holy and wise man as our guide and leader and ask the Lord to enlighten you.

If you asked the Lord the question you ask above, He might answer you - "and do you think YOU are worthy to be receiving Me in the Holy Eucharist?"

 

This is the tactic being employed by liberals/progressives to defend the indefensible, i.e., the pope admitting adulterers and fornicators to Holy Eucharist.

The guidelines of the Church say NOTHING about this question.

They only state that if the communicant is aware of mortal sin to refrain from receiving the Eucharist until they've confessed - and absolution requires a firm purpose to avoid the near occasion of sin and to sin no more.

If the confessor plans to continue living in sin, with no firm purpose to separate or live as brother and sister, then they are STILL living in a state of mortal sin, confession not withstanding, and may not receive the Holy Eucharist (all the emotion laden appeals to situation ethics notwithstanding either.)

 

When I go to confession my sins are gone, wiped away. I am worthy to receive the Eucharist because God believes I am worthy. I have repented.

When couples decide to continue living in Sin, they cannot go to confession for their sins because they haven't actually repented. If they repented they would choose to give up sex in favour of their relationship with God.

Asking the Holy Spirit to Enlighten me on this issue sounds like Protestant speak. The Magisterium is very clear on this issue. The Cross is not easy to carry, but we do it because we love God.

 

What I find amazing about Sacramental Marriage is how often we hear about how one spouse suffers for the soul the other.

We are told that when a Man and Woman are Married they become one flesh. How often I have heard it relayed that one spouse will become an atheist, only to have their spouse suffer for them. Then the spouse that was an atheist eventually converts fully to the Catholic faith. The faithful spouse often will suffer decades for the soul of their partner.

Its hard to fathom why God would allow this to be, after all the one spouse (typically the woman) has been chaste and faithful to God the whole marriage. But then it is realized that the suffering was a gift that allowed them to become Holy.

This goes to show that while marriage is often very difficult, there are unseen spiritual matters happening that the eternal destination of their souls rely on. Sacramental Marriage is not something that can be disregarded when it is inconvenient or even painful. Saint Monica suffered greatly for her husband and child, and look at the outcome. Who would have known that her son would eventually become a Doctor of the Faith. The Cross is never easy, but we are called to Carry it.

 

I wish more people would rush to defend Jesus in the Eucharist than the Holy Father. The Pope gets himself into these situations through his lack of clarity, etc., and he could get himself out of them as well if he chose to. Jesus, on the other hand, is vulnerable and depends solely on us to defend and protect Him.

It's as though a house is burning down, and people are rushing to fix the broken windows. Our focus is the Real Presence in the Eucharist, the source and summit of our faith! Don't lose focus. Protect Him!!! Speak out against any changes in pastoral practice. You will be far more accountable for not defending Jesus in the Eucharist than not defending the Pope.

 

I think you have much to learn about your faith, SH. I hope that when you say these words at Mass, you mean them - or do you? - "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof..."

it is true that Catholics have much to learn about the Holy Spirit! This is of course what Pope Francis means when he speaks positively of the protestant tradition.

The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him.

So pay attention to Pope Francis! The term 'Magisterium' has no meaning without the Pope.

 

See the following posts for my response because I couldn't fit it into one post. Enough time wasted on this. From now on I'll be spending more time talking to God about the Pope than talking to Joe about what the Pope is doing. It all leaves me with a sour taste in my mouth.

 

Was Pope Honorius a heretic? I don't know. I'll leave you to wade through this from Catholic Answers: http://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/pope-honorius-i All that condemning and un-condemning tells me that the Church at the time believed it possible that a Pope could be a heretic. Reading through the ifs, ands and buts dressed up in high-fallutin’ language, I see similarities between then and now. Calling a spade a spade doesn’t always sit well with theologians and scholars. Thank God that Jesus chose a humble fisherman like Peter who didn’t resort to obfuscation or wink and nod teaching on sin and repentance.

Pope Francis hasn't officially changed Church teaching by putting in writing what Cardinal Schonborn is putting into practice and what Cardinals Marx and Kasper have been advocating but he has told us that we should look to Cardinal Schonborn for the meaning and intent of Amoris Laetitia. Archbishop Chaput's statement is straighforward and in line with Church teaching and what Pope John Paul said about Communion for remarried divorcees being restricted to those who live as brother and sister.

Cardinal Schonborn, on the other hand, isn't so straightforward. At about a minute into this video, he explains the Viennese approach : Five questions that have nothing to do with the validity of the first marriage and not a mention of complete continence or even an attempt at it. At about 55 minutes into the video he quotes Pope John Paul saying that divorced and remarried shouldn’t be excluded from the Church and should be encouraged to attend Mass, listen to the word of God, pray for God's grace and raise their children in the faith. He goes on to ask how one can do that while in a state of mortal sin. Since when has being in sin prevented anyone from attending Mass, listening to the word of God, praying or raising children in the faith? Never as far as I know, yet Cardinal Schonborn uses this as a lead-in to admitting remarried divorcees to Holy Communion without a requirement that they abstain from sexual relations. He said all this after being told that he was on the record. I shudder to think what he would have said off the record.

The different interpretations of what Pope Francis intended in Amoris Laetitia falls short of the Faith being presented and expressed with the same sense and the same meaning throughout the Universal Church. Fr. John Hunwicke’s blog explains how important it is that “In whatever ways the Faith is expressed; however new its presentation; whatever theological refinements and developments may be the gifts of the centuries ... it must always be a formulation with the same sense and the same meaning”. The relevant sections are headed “Development”. This link will bring you to the page containing “Development 1” on the 27th June, and the posts on this topic continue through to “Development 7” on the 7th July. http://liturgicalnotes.blogspot.ie/...0+01:00&max-results=12&start=12&by-date=false

I don't know where you get all this hate talk from. I never said that Archbishop Chaput hated Pope Francis. Neither do I hate the Pope. I have never hated anyone in my entire life and I'm not about to start with the Pope. Please stop with the hate talk.

 

This leaves the door wide open for reversing Church teaching that all sexual relations outside a valid marriage are sinful, and Cardinal Schonborn uses the case of the abandoned woman to justify it. I remind you again what Jesus said about a man marrying a woman who had been divorced by her husband......that he caused her to commit adultery. I repeat once again that Jesus left no wriggle room on what constitutes adultery, and Jesus is all merciful.

It wasn't an add on. It is the truth that the slippery slope to selling the organs of unwanted babies started with hard cases. Hard cases led to widespread civil divorce. Hard cases led to widespread artificial birth control. Hard cases led to the legalisation of abortion. Now abortion is so acceptable that selling the organs of unwanted babies is portrayed as a benefit to medical research. The Church was castigated for warning what false mercy would bring at each stage. Now, the same tactics of using hard cases to bring change are being adopted in the Church under the guise of mercy. Pope Francis has praised Italy's most notorious abortionist as a "forgotten great". He praises politicians and celebrities who promote abortion as a solution to everything from climate change to poverty. He knows that abortion is murder, he just doesn't want us saying so too loudly.

In 2013, I thought that Pope Francis was the bees knees. I took all that media blaming, rad trad labelling at face value. It took a long time for me to realise that this Pope’s vision for the Church is something along the lines of liberal Protestantism. Stop trying to label people. Stop calling people haters. Martin Luther called the Pope the anti-Christ, and many of his successors went on to call the Papacy the anti-Christ. For all you or the writer of that blog know, in 500 years' time the pope of the day will be attending a celebration of all the people you label as haters.

I'm sick and tired of this "South American style" nonsense. It might have some traction if it weren't so close to a certain Northern European style. Amazing what German money can achieve. I wouldn't hold out too much hopes of Pope Francis changing any hearts. His track record with his atheist, Jewish, Muslim and Protestant friends doesn't augur well. Sometimes I wonder who is being converted. Evidently he couldn't find a Latin American theologian smart enough to edit a Catholic newspaper so he chose a Protestant. Could be a problem if purgatory crops up. Then again, maybe we're on course to prune the bible for the sake of ecumenism. At the rate we're going, that might make the agenda before the end of this papacy.

Pope Francis can't officially contradict previously defined dogma or doctrine because he doesn't have the authority. He can and is providing cover for Bishops who don't practice what the Church has always taught. Next time he's pointing a finger at what he calls pharisees or heretics, he might remember that three of his fingers are pointing back at himself.

 

Pope Benedict made it very clear that the Holy Spirit doesn't choose the Pope. Cardinal Daneels and the St. Gallen mafia hand picked Cardinal Bergoglio and set about getting him elected. We can thank the likes of Cardinals Daneels, Kasper and Marx for the mess we're in. The faithful were starved of the Truth because Bishops and priests weren’t fully committed to it. For the last time, Joe, Pope Francis is not a new, improved, more merciful Jesus. He is the protege of the St. Gallen Mafia who set about conspiring to have him elected in contravention of Pope John Paul's explicit instructions. Their first effort failed but undaunted they pressed on and succeeded at the second attempt, just like they will press on with their "reforms" until the rest of the Church ends up like Belgium and Germany. Clandestine gatherings somehow don't gel with what we know of the Holy Spirit. Our best hope is that a future Conclave elects a Pope who is capable of preaching the faith clearly so all can understand it before the damage is so endemic that it will take generations to undo. That Pope will be persecuted and the persecutors won’t be short of Pope Francis comments to justify their actions. Perhaps he will also apologise to Catholics for the disgraceful lack of proper catechesis since the “spirit” of Vatican 11 was hijacked by the likes of the people Pope Francis is promoting within the Church. I surely won’t hold my breath waiting for Pope Francis to apologise to Catholic parents who saw their children weaned away from the faith in Catholic schools and universities by promulgaters of the “try something new” approach who treat Christ’s Church as nothing but a global NGO.

Thank God again that Jesus chose a humble fisherman, otherwise we might have no Deposit of Faith to defend.

For those who have eyes to see and read, Cardinal Daneels told us that the St. Gallen mafia decided to do it another way. Christ told us very clearly "If you love me, keep my commandments". He told us "What God has joined together, let no man put asunder". He told us "Any man who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery". He told us "Any man who marries a divorced woman causes her to commit adultery". He told us that adulters, fornicators, liars, hypocrites will not enter the kingdom of heaven. The first public word that Jesus uttered was "repent". He didn't say "have a chat with Andrew about that man you're living with and if Andrew tells you not to be having sex with a man who isn't your husband, try James or John and tell them I sent you". Sadly, Joe, it's the facts that give rise to the fear. We can see the confusion all around us. Respect doesn't demand twisting ourselves into knots trying to figure out whether yes means yes, maybe or not now but later.

There's the hate stuff again. Love of our sovereign Pontiff doesn't mean swallowing a load of drivel that some are trying to pass of as infallible articles of faith. Pope Francis is harming his own reputation by his own words and actions. The respectful, loving thing to do would be to tell him so rather than ass-licking and blaming the media and traditionalists every time he puts his foot in his mouth. Which is the greater sin: sexual relations outside a valid marriage, or pointing out that what the Pope is sanctioning is contrary to what Jesus said about marriage and adultery?

What about it indeed. The secular media are tripping over themselves building up the Pope's reputation and he laps it up as he condemns as heretics and pharisees the same faithful Catholics they have been beating up on for years.. That speaks volumes to me about our Pope.

I gave you credit for sincerity Joe. Reading your comments, I see numerous inferences that anyone who disagrees with your assessment of Pope Francis or doesn't swallow his kindly, eccentric grandfather act is a hater. Perhaps it's time for you to check out the beam in your own eye before condemning others as haters, hatred being one of the seven deadly sins. That's my last word on this thread. I won't be responding to any more of your posts. God bless.