Amoris laetitia chapter 8 is so confusing!

  • Thread starter Thread starter AUGUSTINE1102
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
That’s exactly what myself and others did… relate the previous two Pope’s teachings about sexual relations within irregular marriages.

The reasoning, was that just as JPII “introduced” his restriction for Irregular married couples, Pope Francis is also extending and introducing his guidelines.

It has been very frustrating trying to talk with liberal Catholics about AL!

To the point that I, personally, don’t find AL to be very helpful, without Francis clarifying the Church’s position.

He should take it more serious that many priests and theologians are running with a wrong understanding.

It only takes a few words
 
I do have to ask: Has the Church been absent minded on the nature of culpability and adulterers receiving Holy Communion? I mean, was this modern rationale not known in the previous 2000 years? It seems to me on the official statements of the Church and popes that determination one’s culpability is irrelevant. The fact that their state of life is objectively contrary to the Gospel whether culpable or not. Regardless they are to abstain from sexual union in order for any possibility of returning to the sacraments, despite a determination of culpability or not. Divorce and remarriage is an intrinsic moral evil that is so grave it bars the parties from the sacraments. Whether or not they were culpable. If a couple is made aware of their sin, they are by that very fact, morally obliged to refrain from Holy Communuon. Despite what pope, cardinal, or priest might say. This is Christ’s standard and none of them can change it.
 
TIme will bear witness whether he was a developer or innovator. Development grows naturally and organically from what came before. It also occurs in small incriments. The developed reality should look very close to the previous form. Little difference. Difference in small degree and not in essence. Big leaps and jumps are usually indication of deviation and break.
 
AUGUSTINE1102 said:
The fact that their state of life is objectively contrary to the Gospel whether culpable or not. Regardless they are to abstain from sexual union in order for any possibility of returning to the sacraments, despite a determination of culpability or not.
Click to expand...
Here are examples from Pope Francis. Paragraph 298:
The Church acknowledges situations “where, for serious reasons, such as the children’s upbringing, a man and woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate”.329 There are also the cases of those who made every effort to save their frst marriage and were unjustly abandoned, or of “those who have entered into a second union for the sake of the children’s upbringing, and are sometimes subjectively certain in conscience that their previous and irreparably broken marriage had never been valid”.330
Click to expand...
In paragraph 300 we then get his suggestion for what to do:
What we are speaking of is a process of accompaniment and discernment which “guides the faithful to an awareness of their situation before God. Conversation with the priest, in the internal forum, contributes to the formation of a correct judgment on what hinders the possibility of a fuller participation in the life of the Church and on what steps can foster it and make it grow. Given that gradualness is not in the law itself (cf. Familiaris Consortio, 34), this discernment can never prescind from the Gospel demands of truth and charity, as proposed by the Church.
Click to expand...
No where has he said that people would be allowed to ignore mortal sin. The discernment process is meant to help the couple understand what God wants from them in situations where they cannot separate. This does not necessarily mean they get access to the sacraments.

In order for access to the sacraments, there needs to be a finding that the couple had been denied the sacraments unjustly because of human error or a rush to judgement.
 
Last edited:
mrsdizzyd said:
40.png
AUGUSTINE1102:
The fact that their state of life is objectively contrary to the Gospel whether culpable or not. Regardless they are to abstain from sexual union in order for any possibility of returning to the sacraments, despite a determination of culpability or not.
Click to expand...
Here are examples from Pope Francis. Paragraph 298:
The Church acknowledges situations “where, for serious reasons, such as the children’s upbringing, a man and woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate”.329 There are also the cases of those who made every effort to save their frst marriage and were unjustly abandoned, or of “those who have entered into a second union for the sake of the children’s upbringing, and are sometimes subjectively certain in conscience that their previous and irreparably broken marriage had never been valid”.330
Click to expand...
In paragraph 300 we then get his suggestion for what to do:
What we are speaking of is a process of accompaniment and discernment which “guides the faithful to an awareness of their situation before God. Conversation with the priest, in the internal forum, contributes to the formation of a correct judgment on what hinders the possibility of a fuller participation in the life of the Church and on what steps can foster it and make it grow. Given that gradualness is not in the law itself (cf. Familiaris Consortio, 34), this discernment can never prescind from the Gospel demands of truth and charity, as proposed by the Church.
Click to expand...
No where has he said that people would be allowed to ignore mortal sin. The discernment process is meant to help the couple understand what God wants from them in situations where they cannot separate. This does not necessarily mean they get access to the sacraments.

In order for access to the sacraments, there needs to be a finding that the couple had been denied the sacraments unjustly because of human error or a rush to judgement.
Click to expand...
Nowhere does he talk about sexual relations either. Sexual relations outside of Christian marriage is adultery whether they have been culpable in the past or not.

The Church needs to make couples aware of this first and foremost!

The Church should not try to keep couples ignorant of adultery.

The first step is to acknowledge wrong, whether fully culpable or not. The next step is to express an intention to be continent, or to continue in adultery with the present knowledge. The former allowing reception of Reconciliation and Holy Communion, the latter preventing reception of the Sacraments.

It’s very simple. Painfully difficult in many cases, but very simple.

Ignoring the issue of sexual activity will not help anything.
 
When the Pope says “in conformity with the gospel” that ought to be clear especially since he is addressing the clergy in Chapter 8. Also, considering that Bishops’ guidelines need to be issued it ought to be even more clear what is required.
 
Right, but that is something that NEEDS to be addressed SPECIFICALLY in a document such as this, or it will not be constructive, and even destructive.
 
rcwitness said:
Right, but that is something that NEEDS to be addressed SPECIFICALLY in a document such as this, or it will not be constructive, and even destructive.
Click to expand...
Except that priests know that Jesus calls divorce and remarriage adultery and church documents also class sex outside of marriage as adultery.
 
Last edited:
Reality is some priests, theologians, and you name 'em are quite convinced that these couples can. Why not correct them with one sentence?
 
rcwitness said:
Reality is some priests, theologians, and you name 'em are quite convinced that these couples can. Why not correct them with one sentence?
Click to expand...
He did with more than one sentence by repeatedly saying that these couples must strive to live “in conformity with the gospel” and church teachings.
 
And some think “certain situations” changes things, and they can live in conformity to the Gospel and still have sexual relations with the person who they are now with.

I don’t need AL, and the people who do need to be told things specifically. That is the kind of person they are. They aren’t at home reading their Bibles and reading Church documents. They are most likely cafeteria Catholics.
 
rcwitness said:
And some think “certain situations” changes things, and they can live in conformity to the Gospel and still have sexual relations with the person who they are now with.
Click to expand...
The only “certain situations” that change things are situations were validity of previous marriages are in question or situations were the couple cannot separate and must live together as brother and sister.
 
Sure, but not the necessity to abstain from sexual relations!

I’m sorry Pope Francis gets tired of repeating apostolic Traditions, but that is pretty much his job, Right? If a large document about irregular remarriage fails to specifically address this important law of Christ, then the document will fall short of its intentions.
 
Actually NO!!! And I intentionally don’t want to either.

I’ve read sections

I want to try to understand it from listening to Catholics. Some priests think it means sexual activity can continue after reading it. Some don’t think it’s saying that.

I already told you… I don’t need to read it. You agreed it says nothing new!!

Who is it written for??
 
rcwitness said:
Actually NO!!! And I intentionally don’t want to either.
Click to expand...
If you ever read it, let me know and we can continue this conversation. Until then I’m done.

Have a good evening.
 
Last edited:
Do you agree that there are priests who come to a different conclusion than you and I?
 
“Many folks who have no clue what the texts of Vatican II actually say point to Vatican II for the abuses that go on in the Church today. And many folks who have no clue how to interpret Church documents point to “ambiguities” in a Church text to either justify their misinterpretation of it, or to completely reject the text itself.”

In this I agree. This has been the problem of Vatican II and Amoris. But the fact is very few Catholics read any ecclesial documents. Most hardly know basic catechetical truths let alone reading excessively lengthy conciliar or papal documents. Most just take what Pastor Friendly or Cardinal Lefty says about it. I guarantee you that the faithful under a dissenting modernist like Cardinal Cupich or Bishop McElroy are going to get a very different take than under a faithful prelate like Cardinal Burke, Bishop Olmstead, or Bishop Poprocki. That is the vast majority of Catholic’s knowledge and bent come from. Our Bishop Olmstead stated there WILL BE NO NEW DIRECTIVES to the clergy in light of Amoris. A.k.a “Divorced and remarried” don’t get false hopes up that the Church is changing on this matter.

But you are correct. To understand Vatican II documents properly one must understand the Council of Trent, Vatican I, and the major writings of Leo XIII, Pius X, Pius XI, Pius XII. The post-conciliar reform can be criticized if will. I would argue a great deal of it had no recourse to the Council documents themselves but the whims of modernists and dissenters. Especially the liturgical travesty. But I digress.
 
Last edited:
I find AL extremely easy to read. Direct and very easy to understand. I thank Pope Francis everyday for the give of this Exhortation and pray for many more years of his pontificate. May God Bless him with fortitude.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top