FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Amoris Laetitia footnote contradicts Church’s tradition
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2

                                                        Robert Spaemann, one of the foremost living Catholic philosophers, has said Amoris Laetitia contradicts the traditional teaching of the Church.http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/04/28/amoris-laetitia-footnote-contradicts-churchs-tradition-says-leading-german-philosopher/
I've heard many such criticisms, and not just from the 'fringe groups' either. Even so, some people still make all kinds of theological and philosophical twists and turns to defend everything Pope Francis says and writes. They just don't understand that they really don't have to do that. People need to understand that most of these things are outside of the scope of papal infallibility, and as such should be politely and publicly be corrected.  Pope Francis has no more authority to allow people to receive communion in a state of mortal sin than I do, which is to say absolutely NONE.

                                                                                      But the problem is that we have clergy who are going to treat it as Church teaching and act accordingly.
(04-29-2016, 12:24 PM)Credidi Propter Wrote: [ -> ]I've heard many such criticisms, and not just from the 'fringe groups' either. Even so, some people still make all kinds of theological and philosophical twists and turns to defend everything Pope Francis says and writes. They just don't understand that they really don't have to do that. People need to understand that most of these things are outside of the scope of papal infallibility, and as such should be politely and publicly be corrected.  Pope Francis has no more authority to allow people to receive communion in a state of mortal sin than I do, which is to say absolutely NONE.

Yup. As philosopher in the Thomist tradition, I was particularly disgusted by the twisting of St. Thomas' words in this document. The only possible explanations are ignorance or dishonesty, and neither bode well for the Church. Like most hear, I look forward with great anticipation to the next papacy.
I don't think it will lead to a schism or anything of the sort, as Spaemann suggests. I think he has tried to avoid a schism from the left, by placating them in a footnote or two. However, those little footnotes are all the Kasperites needed. What will orthodox Catholics do? Many are already correcting in public and politely. I notice Cardinal Burke has said that the Pope has not changed Church teaching at all with this document, which is a really interesting comment to make by what he does not say: the Pope has not changed Church teaching on the issue, because for Burke and orthodox Catholics, the Pope cannot change Church teaching, on anything, will he, nill he. As far as the war in the Church is concerned, I think this document has given a lifeline to the heterodox. There are so many things they simply do not understand, and for all of their staring at the world today, they are blind to the obvious: countries, dioceses, bishops that take the heterodox route are dying out and will continue to die out, without vocations, without families. It is life or death. Orthodox Catholic groups, dioceses, bishops and so on are experiencing growth and life and will continue to do so, now under perhaps the burden of greater weight upon thWatch Franceeir shoulders.
But one day in the not too far future there will be a reckoning for Germany and Holland, and Austria, and Argentina, as one by one they experience what is happening in France today: the establishment Church has dwindled to such a point that they will be swallowed up by orthodox Catholics. When this has happened on a global scale, the Church will right itself with documents that clarify, correct, and enforce. The sad reality is that we have to wait for this moment and watch this circus for now.
People in places like the US are dealing with vast numbers of people, so this point is harder to see. There is also a nice core of orthodox bishops in the US. They will likely be quiet and wait it out.
But a replacement is coming. France was so instrumental in the general war against the Church that if we watch France's transformation we can see where the rest of us are headed.
I think this is where a neglect of the traditional censures has gotten us.  This is one of those things that in a vacuum is true: a person in grave sin, but with mitigating circumstances that make it not mortal, can receive the sacraments fruitfully--this is not controversial.

However, given current controversies, it's going to be taken as something erroneous: a blanket permission for divorced and remarried people to approach the sacraments. 

The Church previously categorized propositions in  a variety of ways, including , for example, propositions that may be correct in themselves, but owing to various circumstances of time, place, and persons, are prudently taken to present an erroneous signification (suspect of error); saying something good using objectionable sounding phrases (evil sounding or offensive to pious ears); saying something bad using good sounding phrases (captious);  or even things that are fine in themselves buy could pose a danger to morals.  See here for more:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03532a.htm

These other layers of vigilance seem to be mostly forgotten in recent times, likely as an over reaction to these lesser categories having been treated for practical purposes like definitive, irreformable judgments (when many are quite contingent).  I would disagree  that the footnote here is, say, heresy, but given the circumstances it could be argued that it could justify another label.
(04-29-2016, 12:44 PM)Papist Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-29-2016, 12:24 PM)Credidi Propter Wrote: [ -> ]I've heard many such criticisms, and not just from the 'fringe groups' either. Even so, some people still make all kinds of theological and philosophical twists and turns to defend everything Pope Francis says and writes. They just don't understand that they really don't have to do that. People need to understand that most of these things are outside of the scope of papal infallibility, and as such should be politely and publicly be corrected.  Pope Francis has no more authority to allow people to receive communion in a state of mortal sin than I do, which is to say absolutely NONE.

Yup. As philosopher in the Thomist tradition, I was particularly disgusted by the twisting of St. Thomas' words in this document. The only possible explanations are ignorance or dishonesty, and neither bode well for the Church. Like most hear, I look forward with great anticipation to the next papacy.

The pope is not meant to be someone we can duck behind so that we don't have to fight so hard.  It's nice to have a pope we can rally behind and who we know "has our back."  All Popes SHOULD be like that.  If he isn't, that's on him.  Regardless, we are to study, know, love, and defend the Faith, and do them all the more if those who should do it most seem to fall short.
(04-29-2016, 04:44 PM)Credidi Propter Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-29-2016, 12:44 PM)Papist Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-29-2016, 12:24 PM)Credidi Propter Wrote: [ -> ]I've heard many such criticisms, and not just from the 'fringe groups' either. Even so, some people still make all kinds of theological and philosophical twists and turns to defend everything Pope Francis says and writes. They just don't understand that they really don't have to do that. People need to understand that most of these things are outside of the scope of papal infallibility, and as such should be politely and publicly be corrected.  Pope Francis has no more authority to allow people to receive communion in a state of mortal sin than I do, which is to say absolutely NONE.

Yup. As philosopher in the Thomist tradition, I was particularly disgusted by the twisting of St. Thomas' words in this document. The only possible explanations are ignorance or dishonesty, and neither bode well for the Church. Like most hear, I look forward with great anticipation to the next papacy.

The pope is not meant to be someone we can duck behind so that we don't have to fight so hard.  It's nice to have a pope we can rally behind and who we know "has our back."  All Popes SHOULD be like that.  If he isn't, that's on him.  Regardless, we are to study, know, love, and defend the Faith, and do them all the more if those who should do it most seem to fall short.


This is is not this first time in Church history where the the faithful are living through a time of "Pope(s) Gone Wild!". God is in control and is allowing all of this to happen, rather than worry about the Pope day to day activities the fact that God is allowing this to happen greatly concerns me. In fact, in previous centuries if the Pope was a loose canon most of the faithful probably did not know due to the lack of communication. The current times are a case where immediate communication and misinformation by the media is destroying peoples spiritual well being because it keeps people from focusing on their spiritual journey and focused on what the Pope is doing now, or what Kasper has said or what this cardinal, bishop, priest has said.
We have been given a warning about these times in the Church approved apparitions of Fatima and Akita.

The questions these days should not be what has the Pope said today rather should be are why is God allowing this happen, why were we chosen to live in this time and what are we supposed to be doing about it?

(04-29-2016, 12:44 PM)Papist Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-29-2016, 12:24 PM)Credidi Propter Wrote: [ -> ]I've heard many such criticisms, and not just from the 'fringe groups' either. Even so, some people still make all kinds of theological and philosophical twists and turns to defend everything Pope Francis says and writes. They just don't understand that they really don't have to do that. People need to understand that most of these things are outside of the scope of papal infallibility, and as such should be politely and publicly be corrected.  Pope Francis has no more authority to allow people to receive communion in a state of mortal sin than I do, which is to say absolutely NONE.

Yup. As philosopher in the Thomist tradition, I was particularly disgusted by the twisting of St. Thomas' words in this document. The only possible explanations are ignorance or dishonesty, and neither bode well for the Church. Like most hear, I look forward with great anticipation to the next papacy.
Can you imagine Cardinal Burke becoming Pope? It would be glorious.
The pope's sermon today delves into his thought on marriage.  I find his remarks rather troubling.

http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-understa...iating-the

Here's a portion:

Pope Francis speaks of the “trap” of “casuistry,” concocted by “a small group of enlightened theologians,” convinced that they “have all the knowledge and wisdom of the people of God.” It is a snare from which Jesus escapes, he says, by going “beyond,” “to the fullness of matrimony.” The Lord had already done so with the Sadducees, the Pope recalled, when they had questioned Him about the woman who had had seven husbands. At the resurrection, Jesus affirmed, she would not be the wife of any of them, because in heaven “they neither marry nor are given in marriage.”

In that case, the Pope said, Christ looked to the “eschatological fullness” of marriage. With the Pharisees, on the other hand, He referred to “the fullness of the harmony of creation.” “God created them male and female,” and “the two became one flesh.”

“They are no longer two, but one flesh,” and so “no human must separate what God has joined. Both in the case of the levirate marriage and in this case, Jesus responds with the overwhelming truth, with the blunt truth: This is the truth! Always from the fullness. And Jesus never negotiates with the truth. And these people, this small group of enlightened theologians, always negotiate with the truth, reducing it to casuistry. And Jesus never negotiates with the truth. And this is the truth about marriage, there is no other.

Truth and understanding

“But Jesus,” Pope Francis continued, “so merciful, He is so great, that he never, never, never, closes the door to sinners.” And so He does not limit Himself to proclaiming the truth of God, but goes on to ask the Pharisees what Moses had established in the Law. And when the Pharisees responded that Moses permitted a husband to write a bill of divorce, Jesus replied that this was permitted “because of the hardness of your hearts.” That is, the Pope explained, Jesus always distinguished between the truth and “human weakness” without “twisting words.”

In the world in which we live, with this culture of the provisional, this reality of sin is so strong. But Jesus, recalling Moses, tells us: “But there is hardness of heart, there is sin, something can be done: forgiveness, understanding, accompaniment, integration, discernment of these cases… But always… But the truth is never sold. And Jesus is capable of stating this very great truth, and at the same time being so understanding with sinners, with the weak.

Forgiveness is not an equation

And so, Pope Francis emphasized, these are “the two things that Jesus teaches us: truth and understanding.” This is what the “enlightened theologians” fail to do, because they are closed in the trap of “a mathematical equation” of “Can it be done? Can it not be done?” and so they are “incapable both of great horizons, and of love” for human weakness. It is enough to see, the Pope concluded, the “delicacy” with which Jesus treated the adulteress woman who was about to be stoned: “Neither do I condemn you: Go forth, and sin no more.”

May Jesus teach us to have at heart a great adhesion to the truth, and also at heart a great understanding and accompaniment for all our brothers who are in difficulty. And this is a gift, this is what the Holy Spirit teaches us, not these enlightened doctors, who to teach us need to reduce the fullness of God to a casuistic equation. May the Lord give us this grace.
Pages: 1 2