Skip to main content

Traditiones Custodes - The Gift That Keeps On Taking - Part B

 +
JMJ

It has been a few months since TC was and the Dubia have been published (I'm writing this Jan 1, 2022)

Clarification: I'm not talking about the dubia concerning Amoris Laetitia (see links below),but the dubia concerning Traditiones Custodes (link).  

Here's something to consider: Traditiones is about an artifact of the faith - something that expresses it - the Mass. From my perspective Amoris Laetitia is more important because it touches explicitly on the Sacrament and provides a venue.

I'm happy to hear about the uproar of TC, although after the FFI it was to be expected.  The real danger is in the attempts to change the perception of Church Teaching.

As in other things, the leaders of the Catholic Church attempt to make exceptions to the Truth instead of their duty. 

I wonder what else will have happened in the first four months of 2022.  I predict that the Eccelsia Dei communities will be experiencing the happy embrace that the Holy Father provided to the FFI. That is, barring some Divine Intervention.

P^3



Amoris Laetitia - Links and the Dubia!

https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/search/label/Amoris%20Laetitia

For the record: Pope Francis confirms Amoris Laetitia allows communion for adulterers

Cupich: In AL Francis exercises the "divinely granted Petrine power of loosening and binding"

[UPDATE]: IMPORTANT: Bishop Athanasius Schneider interview with Rorate Caeli on "Profession of the Immutable Truths", communion for "divorced and remarried"

 

Three Tiny Notes on Amoris Laetitia

 

EXPLOSIVE! 4 Cardinals OFFICIALLY ask Pope Francis to Clarify Amoris Laetitia - Updated 

 The "dubia"


It is asked whether, following the affirmations of Amoris Laetitia (nn. 300-305), it has now become possible to grant absolution in the sacrament of penance and thus to admit to Holy Communion a person who, while bound by a valid marital bond, lives together with a different person more uxorio without fulfilling the conditions provided for by Familiaris Consortio n. 84 and subsequently reaffirmed by Reconciliatio et Paenitentia n. 34 and Sacramentum Caritatis n. 29. Can the expression “in certain cases” found in note 351 (n. 305) of the exhortation Amoris Laetitia be applied to divorced persons who are in a new union and who continue to live more uxorio?

After the publication of the post-synodal exhortation Amoris Laetitia (cf. n. 304), does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s encyclical Veritatis Splendor n. 79, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, on the existence of absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts and that are binding without exceptions?

After Amoris Laetitia (n. 301) is it still possible to affirm that a person who habitually lives in contradiction to a commandment of God’s law, as for instance the one that prohibits adultery (cf. Mt 19:3-9), finds him or herself in an objective situation of grave habitual sin (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Declaration, June 24, 2000)?

After the affirmations of Amoris Laetitia (n. 302) on “circumstances which mitigate moral responsibility,” does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s encyclical Veritatis Splendor n. 81, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, according to which “circumstances or intentions can never transform an act intrinsically evil by virtue of its object into an act ‘subjectively’ good or defensible as a choice”?

After Amoris Laetitia (n. 303) does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s encyclical Veritatis Splendor n. 56, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, that excludes a creative interpretation of the role of conscience and that emphasizes that conscience can never be authorized to legitimate exceptions to absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts by virtue of their object?

 

 

 

 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Communiqué on the Meeting between Cardinal Ladaria and Fr. Pagliarani

+ JMJ I suspect that the 'resistance' will be freaking out about this ... but as with the Archbishop, when Rome calls ... they go ... even if just to let them know (again) why they do what they do. Concerning the alleged 'sell-out' I have this to say: I should update the meme ... with 2017, 18 etc. The 'resistors' should stop and think a little: We are in the 18th year of the latest sell-out frenzy. So we're still waiting. Try and reconcile the 'resistance' positions with the Catholic Faith. If it doesn't objectively sync up - admit that you're wrong and take appropriate action. I have also attached some commentary from CFN. P^3 Courtesy of FSSPX.news Courtesy of Catholic Family News Communiqué on the Meeting between Cardinal Ladaria and Fr. Pagliarani November 24, 2018 By Eucharistic Crusade The Palace of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith i...

"Father, Should I Attend That Mass?" Advice on Attending Non-SSPX Latin Masses

 + JMJ I see that the 'resistors' are in a tizzy because Fr. Robinson used them as an example instead of the sedevacantists. What is interesting is that you can apply the exact same reasons against going to a sede mass as that of the 'resistors'. Namely: On the other extreme are those situations where an SSPX priest knows that a certain non-SSPX traditionalist venue is a grave danger to the faith . Frankly, most, if not all, of the Resistance Masses would fall into this category. In many cases, the behavior of these priests has been and continues to be scandalous, by their (A) spirit, their (B) preaching, and their indiscriminate conferral of the (C) priesthood and (D) episcopacy. To attend a Mass with such ongoing scandals poses a serious danger to the souls of the faithful. Yep, looking at A,B,C and D the shoe fits. On this basis the "resistors" = "sedevacantists". P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.org   A companion article to a recent "Questions with ...

Stories: Early Days of Tradition Part 9 - The Novus-Ordo, Requiems and Holy Thursday

 + JMJ I am not a 'cradle' Traditional Catholic. In fact, one of my earliest 'church memories' is of the pews in my family's first parish.  Specifically, how they tasted. I remember a lot of people standing up around me as I got as much of the pew in my mouth as possible.   At that moment as I reached the sweet spot, an older lady caught my eye and I got the impression she was less that impressed that I had achieved the maximally effective amount of pew in my 4 year-old mouth. Looking back, I realised that the parish of my youth was a haven for Conservative Catholics. The Pastor had succeeded in isolating the parish from much of the madness of the 1970's. The result of a conservative parish with doctrinally sound teaching, catechesis and confessions was a parish packed to capacity. The downside, as I heard decades later, was that when a young member of that parish moved into another parish, he found a completely different Church from the one in which he had grow...

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin - July 6, 1988

There has been some discussion (read lots) about the term 'Conciliar Church'. I have posted this letter written by the Superior General and District Superiors of the SSPX after the 1988 Consecrations. Of particular interest is that the 'Conciliar Church' being referred to as a system. My paraphrase would be that the SSPX regards the 'conciliar Church' as an error within the Church. Source Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops