Amoris laetitia chapter 8 is so confusing!

[rcwitness]

I hear a lot of things like, it is not magisterial, it is magisterial but not binding or infallible, it’s not a document about marriage and family, it is a document that gives more accurate details about marriage and family… etc.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

Funny thing about reading something for yourself… You don’t have to rely on what other people are telling you.

 

[rcwitness]

Funny thing about reading something for yourself… You don’t have to rely on what other people are telling you.

Do you think reading the whole thing will change the fact that it still needs to reconcile with FC?

I will read the article you gave from the Cardinal. That might help, if anything.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

Do you think reading the whole thing will change the fact that it still needs to reconcile with FC?

If you read his argument for why AL is in continuity with FC and why he is making the pastoral suggestions he is making perhaps you will be better able to construct your critique of AL.

As it is right now, you are just parroting the ideas of other people.

 

[rcwitness]

If you read his argument for why AL is in continuity with FC and why he is making the pastoral suggestions he is making perhaps you will be better able to construct your critique of AL.

Yes, I am open minded.

As it is right now, you are just parroting the ideas of other people.

I wouldn’t say that. I am recognizing what even Bishops see as potential contradiction.

I’ve read chapter 8, and I don’t think it’s nearly as clear as FC or Joseph Ratzinger’s explanation of the matter.

What it comes down to, I believe, is that Pope Francis is trying to say that there are situations that cannot fit a norm, or universal rule. But Ratzinger seemed to relate that there is a universal norm, which “cannot be modified because of different situations”.

I will try to get back to you after reading the article by Cardinal Lisbon.

 

[AUGUSTINE1102]

"…consolidated over time, with new children, proven fidelity, generous self-giving, Christian commitment, a consciousness of its irregularity and of the great difficulty of going back without feeling in conscience that one would fall into new sins.’”

While this is a good definition of “irregular unions” I would ask anyone here to show anywhere in this definition of criterion in which the first valid union could be dissolved. As nice as the definition is, it in no way mitigates the sin of leaving the valid union and procuring a second, invalid one. As Fr. Chad Ripperger FSSP pointed out in both Amoris and the new canonical “fast track” drive thru" annulment process, none of the criterion put forth has any bearing on annul in first unions. Hard luck cases, as sad and tragic as they are, do not render “get of jail free cards.” If the first union is valid, and the Church always assumes that, then a second union is sinful and wrong until proven otherwise. It seems that the new rationale is: “if it’s too hard to be a good Catholic in matters of marriage and sexuality, we will try to find a way for you to continue in sin.”

 

[rcwitness]

Funny thing about reading something for yourself… You don’t have to rely on what other people are telling you.

I haven’t read the entire Bible either! But I converted to Catholicism from Evangelical.

I listened to what people had to say.

 

[ConstantLearner]

AL is a response to our time, not the Church of the 1950’s or before. It is not changing anything other than asking Pastors of souls to accompany people to the fullness of truth that is the Church.

Yes, you’re right. I’ve been put off by some Catholics I know who’ve divorced and remarried and know they should not take communion, but see AL as a way to do so. As you said, AL doesn’t change a thing except ask pastors to give more guidance to those who don’t understand. I do have sympathy for the ones who do not understand and perhaps never did.

 

[rcwitness]

I’m not sure if you think AL is helpful or harmful… Or both?

 

[Ghosty1981]

Why does he need to? I don’t understand why you are obsessed by this point. How can “living in conformity with the gospel” be interpreted any other way? Sex outside of valid marriage is adultery according to the gospel.

Here is what the Maltese guidelines say about this point:
“Throughout the discernment process, we should also examine the possibility of conjugal continence. Despite the fact that this ideal is not at all easy, there may be couples who, with the help of grace, practice this virtue without putting at risk other aspects of their life together. On the other hand, there are complex situations where the choice of living “as brothers and sisters” becomes humanly impossible and give rise to greater harm (see AL, note 329)”

and:
“If, as a result of the process of discernment, undertaken with “humility, discretion and love for the Church and her teaching, in a sincere search for God’s will and a desire to make a more perfect response to it” (AL 300), a separated or divorced person who is living in a new relationship manages, with an informed and enlightened conscience, to acknowledge and believe that he or she are at peace with God, he or she cannot be precluded from participating in the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist (see AL, notes 336 and 351)”

The Pope did not correct this interpretation of Amoris Laetitia, nor of the interpretations of these specific footnotes. So there are indeed interpretations, put into guidelines by Bishops, that allow for sexual relations and the reception of Sacraments.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

There is a process within the Church structure for dealing with erroneous applications of any given teaching. The appropriate persons should follow that process.

 

[Ghosty1981]

There is a process within the Church structure for dealing with erroneous applications of any given teaching. The appropriate persons should follow that process.

Pope Francis has refused to engage those that have followed this process. The dubia was raised with precisely these questions in mind, after all. It is not as if the Pope is unaware of these guidelines that interpret AL in this manner, and they have even been published in full in the Vatican newspaper.

The claim that AL is clear and that it precludes the reception of the Sacraments by sexually active couples in second marriages simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

mrsdizzyd:

There is a process within the Church structure for dealing with erroneous applications of any given teaching. The appropriate persons should follow that process.

Pope Francis has refused to engage those that have followed this process. The dubia was raised with precisely these questions in mind, after all. It is not as if the Pope is unaware of these guidelines that interpret AL in this manner, and they have even been published in full in the Vatican newspaper.

Dubia are not the normal process. The normal process is to go through the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

 

[rcwitness]

mrsdizzyd:

There is a process within the Church structure for dealing with erroneous applications of any given teaching. The appropriate persons should follow that process.

Pope Francis has refused to engage those that have followed this process. The dubia was raised with precisely these questions in mind, after all. It is not as if the Pope is unaware of these guidelines that interpret AL in this manner, and they have even been published in full in the Vatican newspaper.

The claim that AL is clear and that it precludes the reception of the Sacraments by sexually active couples in second marriages simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

Is this because going to confession each time is too laborsom?

 

[rcwitness]

A sincere confession to willfully (with God’s necessary help) turn from immoral sex. Problem solved, receive Communion!! Amen, amen.

 

[Ghosty1981]

The normal process for getting clarification about a Pope’s writings is to ask the Pope what he meant. The Pope has refused to directly answer the questions posed about AL.

If AL is as clear as you claim, then the Maltese guidelines should not exist. Whether or not the Maltese guidelines are erroneous is a different question from whether or not AL is a clear document. The fact that authoritative guidelines that directly contradict your interpretation exist, and have been allowed to stand without correction, indicates at the very least that AL is not clear cut in its direction.

 

[Ghosty1981]

This is not required by the Maltese guidelines.

 

[rcwitness]

Exactly. Thats what doesnt make sense to me… the most.

It’s meeting with a priest for guidance, refusing to receive pardon for adultery, and the priest saying, “no problem… you are at peace with God. Receive His body and blood.”

It’s a direct contradiction.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

The normal process for getting clarification about a Pope’s writings is to ask the Pope what he meant. The Pope has refused to directly answer the questions posed about AL.

You misunderstand me. When a bishop acts in a questionable way the proper protocol is for inquiries to be sent to the CDF.

People have their own agendas. I have no doubt in my mind that people will misuse AL just as people have misused and misinterpreted literally every papal document issued. This is what the CDF is for.

 

[Ghosty1981]

You are talking about misbehaving bishops, but we are talking about the clarity of AL. You are assuming that the Maltese bishops are misinterpreting AL, but there is no reason to believe that this is the case.

The point is that AL lends itself to the Maltese interpretation, and to claim that it clearly doesn’t allow for such an interpretation seems misguided. If interpretations such as the Maltese one can be taken from AL and made into guidelines, then either AL is not clear on the matter, or the Maltese guidelines follow the correct interpretation.