Skip to main content

Amoris laetitia

Image
By
+
JMJ

Update: Joseph Shaw published a conclusion here - see end of this post.

There has been a lot (read onslaught) of commentary on the latest issuance of Pope Francis - Amoris Laetitia.

First, I am not going to waste my precious time reading it - because time is precious and reading ambiguous phrases that are merely the result / repeat of a subservience the human respect the emerged fully during the Second Vatican Council is wasted.



Second, there are other far better minds (see below) who have been chewing on this tidbit for a while.

What I will observe is that we have a classic case of cognitive dissonance occurring in a variety of people.



  • Action: Pope Francis issues a document that implicitly states that people in an objective state of mortal sin can approach the Sacrament of the Eucharist.
  • Belief: Popes can do no wrong.
  • Dissonance Increases (head going to explode): Pope Francis continually performs an admixture of actions that are objectively wrong - causing mental and spiritual anguish.
  • Options:
    • Change Belief: Pope can (and has) done wrong.
      • This would lead (ultimately) to the theological conclusions of the SSPX and potentially (if not schooled in Chruch Teaching) sedevacantism.
    • Change Action: Pope really didn't write this etc.
    • Change Perception of Action: The Pope didn't Change Doctrine so all is ok! :-)
      • Yep Pope didn't change doctrine, full points for noticing that.  
      • This little detail is an attempt to escape what IS in the document - that the conscience is king (or queen) and who are we to try and inform these poor souls of the truth of their situation in the eyes of God.  
  • Dissonance Decreases (just a dull pain behind the eyes): Pope didn't mean 'that'.
    • The only problem is that the dull pain behind the eyes is a symptom of a bigger problem: brain cancer.
-OR-


People who will try to bend the spoon usually end up being bent themselves.


I look forward to reading the SSPX commentary as well.

Two items that struck me:
Fr. Hunwicke: Indeed and indeedio, so it does. That is precisely why, over the years, this blog has been hammering away, in season and out of season, at the truth that such development must be eodem sensu eademque sententia. Readers will recall that this principle, enunciated repeatedly by modern pontiffs down to Benedict XVI, goes back through S Vincent of Lerins to an immensely Magisterial writer, S Paul of Tarsus, who was not an Austrian.
Joseph Shaw: Note again, as I pointed out in previous posts, the possibility of moral ignorance isexplicitly ruled out: Amoris laetitia has no interest in suggesting that the sins of a couple in an illicit union are not mortal because of ignorance of the rules. This was a common strategy among liberal priests in relation to contraception in the 1970s. No, we have moved on from that option. Rather, the question is raised: will it not do harm, to follow the rules? It asks the question; it does not provide the answer.

P^3

Update from Joseph Shaw -Last paragraph 'says it all':
What we have now is not the final melt-down of the Church. We have, perhaps, a negative step, but if so it is one of many. We may perhaps say that the teaching of the Church is not as clear as it was, but this obscuring of the teaching has been a long, slow process. More serious, I think, by far, than Amoris laetitia, was the deliberate removal of dozens and dozens of references to sin, God's anger, damnation, repentance, penance, and grace, from the prayers of the liturgy, which happened with the promulgation of the 1970 Missal. That was a disaster for the Church, and the consequences continue to make themselves felt. It wasn't the proclamation of heresy: no, and that makes the whole sorry business harder to combat, in some ways. But in another way it means that there is something we can each and every one of us do, to reinforce the threatened truth: and that is, to pray the ancient liturgy, and to promote it.


Commentary worth reading:

Fr. Hunwicke
Joseph Shaw
Principle of Double Effect (see part on St. Thomas)

Labels

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

By
+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...
Post a Comment
Read more

If Pope Francis is bad - what about Pope St. John Paul II et al?

By
+ JMJ So here we are on the apparent cusp of yet another post conciliar Papal canonization. This time we have Pope's John-Paul I and Paul VI canonizations to 'look forward' to. This follows, obviously, on the heels of Pope St. John Paul II's canonization? So the first question that I usually encounter is: How is it possible, keeping in mind the doctrine on infallibility of canonizations (note doctrine not dogma), that Pope St. John Paul II is a Saint? First, what does it mean???  According to the doctrine of dogmatic facts - it is the universal opinion of Theologians that canonizations are infallible.  It means that they enjoy the beatific vision.  ... that's it.  That is the doctrine and it is at the level of universal opinion of theologians.  It is called a 'dogmatic fact'. That they made mistakes is obvious.  That the miracles seem to not be very miraculous is also a bit of an issue. Here's something to consider: The rush that surrou...
16 comments
Read more

A Reply to Martin Blackshaw’s FLAWED Remnant article titled: FLAWED: SSPX Advice on Abortion-tainted Vaccines

By
 + JMJ    An article has appeared in the Remnant (link to article) and I am afraid that there are a number of flaws in it that need to be addressed. The author, Martin Blackshaw, believes that both the Church and the SSPX are misapplying the principle of Moral Theology called 'Cooperation In Evil'.  Unfortunately, Mr. Blackshaw rests most of his arguments on citing authors that support his position, without considering the possibility that they are wrong. This highlights a key factor in this crisis: ignorance of the faith and its application . I don't am not singling out Mr. Blackshaw for this criticism, I have observed that it applies to laity and religious, superior and subject a like.  No one seems immune in this enduring crisis, myself included.  I further believe that this ignorance is why so many Catholics, both traditional and non, rely on their gut feeling or "Catholic conscience" for charting their way through this crisis of the faith.  While...
25 comments
Read more

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

By
Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...
8 comments
Read more