Archbishop Chaput: Kasper proposal is 'emotive' [CC]

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Press
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don’t think anyone is suggesting stoning the divorced and remarried. Jesus told the woman caught in adultery, “Neither do I condemn you. From now on, avoid this sin.” This is no different than what the Church tells anyone caught in a sinful situation.

He didn’t tell the woman, “Neither do I condemn you. Continue in adultery with a clear conscience.” That would certainly have been leading her astray.
 
We’re human beings too. We have to take note of the requirements of the human beings in the parable.
I understand that. You asked why the servant’s rendering of the two attributes were less than perfect. The answer is simply that he is a human being.
You’re doing word gymnastics here.
I just quoted the passage and commented. 🤷
Parables are like Scripture for dummies and don’t need to be reinvented. God opened the door of mercy to the servant and forgave his debt. When the servant decided to subject his debtor to the just law, God made him walk through the door of justice himself. First there was the door of mercy and then there was the door of justice. We can’t interchange them because we don’t like the idea of our debtors getting away without paying.
I’m not interchanging them in the sense of removing their distinct qualities. You’re not seeing what I’m saying. They are distinct attributes of one God who wills one end for all of us. Only in God are they perfectly unified working together for the purpose of love.
Dives in Misericordia:
w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_30111980_dives-in-misericordia.html
In this way, mercy is in a certain sense contrasted with God’s justice, and in many cases is shown to be not only more powerful than that justice but also more profound. Even the Old Testament teaches that, although justice is an authentic virtue in man, and in God signifies transcendent perfection nevertheless love is “greater” than justice: greater in the sense that it is primary and fundamental. Love, so to speak, conditions justice and, in the final analysis, justice serves love. The primacy and superiority of love vis-a-vis justice - this is a mark of the whole of revelation - are revealed precisely through mercy. This seemed so obvious to the psalmists and prophets that **the very term justice ended up by meaning the salvation accomplished by the Lord and His mercy.**53 Mercy differs from justice, but is not in opposition to it, if we admit in the history of man - as the Old Testament precisely does-the presence of God, who already as Creator has linked Himself to His creature with a particular love. Love, by its very nature, excludes hatred and ill - will towards the one to whom He once gave the gift of Himself: Nihil odisti eorum quae fecisti, "you hold nothing of what you have made in abhorrence."54 These words indicate the profound basis of the relationship between justice and mercy in God, in His relations with man and the world. They tell us that we must seek the life-giving roots and intimate reasons for this relationship by going back to “the beginning,” in the very mystery of creation. They foreshadow in the context of the Old Covenant **the full revelation **of God, who is "love."55
 
In the interview with Archbishop Chaput he was asked about “the internal forum” and ‘national bishops’ conferences’ amongst other issues:
A lot of media attention focused on the question of reception of Communion for the divorced-remarried, and the German small-group report proposed that this issue could be addressed through “the internal forum.” What exactly does this mean, and do you see this proposal as a way to move the discussion forward without compromising Church teachings?
To oversimplify, it amounts to shifting the decision about receiving Communion down to the individual divorced and remarried person, with the counsel of a priest. This sounds like a merciful solution, but it’s a very imprudent idea. If the” internal forum” approach — which appears nowhere in canon law or Church teaching — can be used for divorce and remarriage, why not for contraception, abortion, or a dozen other hard issues? It creates many more problems than it tries to fix.

Australian Archbishop Mark Coleridge indicated that support might be present among the synod fathers for another idea promoted by the German bishops, that regional and national bishops’ conferences should be allowed to adopt varying local practices with respect to issues like reception of Communion for divorced-remarried couples. Has there been any discussion of this?
Again, in the view of many synod fathers, this isn’t a good idea. We’re living in a confused age. The last thing we need is disunity in sacramental practice. There’s good and bad decentralization. Fragmentation of practice on matters of substance isn’t the good kind. It inevitably leads to fragmentation of belief.
Read more: ncregister.com/daily-news/archbishop-chaput-on-the-synod-very-positive-but-not-problem-free/#ixzz3pLHEz9AD
 
I understand that. You asked why the servant’s rendering of the two attributes were less than perfect. The answer is simply that he is a human being.
And I replied that we are human beings too. We are less than perfect also. If we are applying laws with punishments that fit crimes… we have to be aware that that is our human version of justice. Once there was a punishment for murder that was fairly inflexible. Then with the understanding of mental illness, addiction and social discrimination… there is a wider scope for the mitigation of crime. We can adjust lawss to account for that because that is merciful. We can never apply the law with perfect justice like God does because we are just human. Likewise, theology is an ongoing discipline that continues to help us understand biblical times and how scripture might apply to us in our different time.

The unmerciful servant was unmerciful because he knew of Gods mercy and refused to follow suit with his own debtors. We aren’t going to get a free pass by saying well by applying justice strictly in accordance with the law I am also being merciful because that’s how God works. We aren’t God. We haven’t go the omnipotence or omniscience to claim perfect merciful justice in whatever decision we make. We apply strict justice when the common good is served by it and we apply mercy when the common good is served by that.
 
Check out this article by Jimmy Akin:

Did the German-Speaking Bishops Just Endorse the Kasper Proposal?

jimmyakin.com/2015/10/did-the-german-speaking-bishops-just-endorse-the-kasper-proposal.html
That does appear to be the case.

Professor Thomas Stark, who teaches at the Benedict XVI Academy of Philosophy and Theology (Heiligenkreuz) in Vienna, said the proposal, presented by the German-language small group at the Synod on the Family on Wednesday, was just another means to “get their agenda through” and a repetition of what they have proposed before but now “in other clothes.”

Read more: ncregister.com/daily-news/throwing-doctrine-to-the-lions-german-bishops-float-internal-forum-proposal/#ixzz3pOIObar7
 
Check out this article by Jimmy Akin:

Did the German-Speaking Bishops Just Endorse the Kasper Proposal?

jimmyakin.com/2015/10/did-the-german-speaking-bishops-just-endorse-the-kasper-proposal.html
I luv ya, Jimmy, but I disagree that it is a ‘compromise’ document. It’s ‘synodal’. In general my observation is that since World War II, German people are not very confrontational. Perhaps it is a legacy of guilt and humility, but this group of Bishops has something to teach us about synodality.
 
👍 **“Go and sin no more.” **

And He didn’t go into a long explanation about how possibly she wasn’t really
in a state of sin because her conscience told her otherwise.
Jesus never at any time referred to such a thing as “state of sin” objective or otherwise. The point is either moot or universally assumed. Mostly he dealt with people as individuals, and sin as individual which require specific forgiveness, albeit an infinite amount of times. The only people he condemned en masse were scribes, Pharisees, lawyers and maybe rich, though the last is open to interpretation.
 
I luv ya, Jimmy, but I disagree that it is a ‘compromise’ document. It’s ‘synodal’.
Jimmy Akin is, among other things, a wordsmith. Compromise is more universal than synodal, but you are using it in the same manner. As a very literal writer, I would not view the word “compromise” with disdain. It does not have to carry negative connotation. Compromise has existed since the very first council, officiated by St. James who proposed a compromise between Sts. Peter and Paul. If it weren’t for God’s great ability to compromise, we would bear the final judgment of all our sin and all be destined for Hell.
 
I really do not care for the dichotomy of the two sides where one is view as pastoral and the other as theological. Cardinal Kasper has theological reasons and is a doctrinally permissible solution. Cardinal Chaput is fighting it for solidly pastoral reasons. The current process of denying communion of remarried people is pastoral and doctrinal. It is just not the only doctrinal and pastoral approach.

I think I do agree with Cardinal Chaput that whatever is done needs to be universal and encoded in canon law, though I really kind of lean toward what Cardinal Kasper is saying to be that solution. Ironically enough, I consider it the more doctrinally sound.
 
Jimmy Akin is, among other things, a wordsmith. Compromise is more universal than synodal, but you are using it in the same manner. As a very literal writer, I would not view the word “compromise” with disdain. It does not have to carry negative connotation. Compromise has existed since the very first council, officiated by St. James who proposed a compromise between Sts. Peter and Paul. If it weren’t for God’s great ability to compromise, we would bear the final judgment of all our sin and all be destined for Hell.
I have been more inclined to the recent psychological buzz words that define something more alive and uniting than compromise. Synergy for example is a word I’ve really liked but avoided because it has been to associated with new age ideologies. Synodal though is a good and similar word but fully Catholic!
 
Ladies and Gentlemen:

While I am anxious to hear the closing comments in the final report, I did hear a report from *EWTN *last Thursday night (10-22-15) that the majority of the Italian Bishops and Bishops from English speaking countries (as well as the Polish Bishops and African Bishops - who have stood their ground on tradition - thanks) have been vocal about keeping the church teachings “as-is” on the reception of the Holy Eucharist. The German Bishops and some of the Bishops from Spanish speaking countries have been more progressive, and the French Bishops have been indifferent.

I hope and pray that the end result is to keep things the way they are. No communion for the divorced and remarried who are in irregular marriages (i.e. without an annulment and IMHO that includes couples who are playing house, regardless of marital status) and a big “NO” to sodomite marriages. I saw a rainbow flag in front of an Episcopal church in California, and it made me sick to my stomach. I also saw one in front of a Unitarian church about 15 miles away from my home - ugh.

I also hope and pray that the Church will not be divided into regional councils where a Bishop or a Cardinal can say “well, divorced and remarried can receive Eucharist here”. What happened to Universal? I heard that Archbishop Kurtz of the USConference of Catholic Bishops mentioned this too - the Catholic Church is Universal.

My convert friends (and I myself am a revert) became Catholic in part because the Church is Universal. Certain Baptist churches are governed by the Southern Baptist Convention, the Methodist churches have a similar governing body, the Presbyterians are called “split P’s”, and the Episcopalians are also divided. I believe the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth is one of the last dioceses (it was 25 years ago) that would not ordain women.

Anyway, I’ll wait for the official press release, and see how Edward Pentin, Raymond Arroyo, and a few others give a report. Raymond has been asking good questions, so I strongly recommend watching The World Over Live.

I do like Archbishop Chaput, and I’m glad Daniel Cardinal DiNardo from Texas was one of the 13. Chaput mentioned too that English translations were not readily available, and the secular media often does a poor job covering issues on the Holy Catholic Church.
 
Why do you’hope and pray’ for certain specfic outcomes? Shouldn’t you be hoping and praying for the will of God to be revealed through this process?
 
That does appear to be the case.

Professor Thomas Stark, who teaches at the Benedict XVI Academy of Philosophy and Theology (Heiligenkreuz) in Vienna, said the proposal, presented by the German-language small group at the Synod on the Family on Wednesday, was just another means to “get their agenda through” and a repetition of what they have proposed before but now “in other clothes.”

Read more: ncregister.com/daily-news/throwing-doctrine-to-the-lions-german-bishops-float-internal-forum-proposal/#ixzz3pOIObar7
The Kaspar proposal has a rather long history, apparently going back to at least 1993. See this article: “When Ratzinger said No; a History of the Kaspar Proposal.”
 
This is from Crisis Magazine. They are using broken quotes with a massive interjection of what they call journalism. It has too much emotional content for me to grant it credence. I am sure like-minded readers will enjoy it.
I didn’t notice any emotionalism. It simply lays out the history of a proposal first brought out by the German bishop’s in 1993 and the responses thereto. For those who think that this is a new proposal this might be an interesting insight. The article concludes:

“Whether Cardinal Kasper will eventually triumph in his lifelong quest to open the door to sacramental Communion for the divorced and civilly remarried is still a matter of debate. What cannot be debated is the persistence of a man who has not allowed himself to be dissuaded from an opinion that he once adopted, and has never since questioned.”
 
As an Archbishop whose tasks and accomplishments have been many and quite varied, I find the idea of calling one aspect of that life a “life-long quest” melodramatic. I also find it ironic since this thread title is about the Archbishop’s proposal being emotive. I have sure seen a great deal of emotion on both sides and would be pressed to say which group has been the most “emotive”.
 
As an Archbishop whose tasks and accomplishments have been many and quite varied, I find the idea of calling one aspect of that life a “life-long quest” melodramatic. I also find it ironic since this thread title is about the Archbishop’s proposal being emotive. I have sure seen a great deal of emotion on both sides and would be pressed to say which group has been the most “emotive”.
I agree that there has been a great deal of emotion on both sides. I just found it interesting that the proposal had been asserted especially by the German bishops for so long a period of time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top