Bishop Thomas Gumbleton at Syracuse, NY

[Brendan]

But there is more to ‘law’ than simply making a statement…the law has to be received as well by those hearing it.

Christ told us that much in the parable of the sower,.

Then there is the fact that anything the pope ‘says’ does not become something i personally have to ascent to…

Just matters of Faith, Morals and on all matters of Church discipline and governance of the Church.

All other statements may be ignored.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Given the facts above, I would fire Person B. Assuming that our goal is to save immortal souls and not just satisfy the media, that is.

IMHO Person A needs supervision and no authority over others. Legal action might be taken in this case. If no legal action is taken then let the Pope keep him in line with very close supervision.

Person A is breaking both God’s Laws and human laws and needs to be punished for those transgressions. The old saying is “put under the Jail” I believe.

Person B needs to be fired and have no authority over a souls salvation and safety. Eternity is just that forever and God will not be mocked.

Person B is breaking Gods commandments and not mans as far as we know. So his punishment is to come from the Church and God.

 

[frommi]

Well, let us be honest. The proscription regarding contraception is binding and infallible. The constant talk of “dialogue” is disingenuous.

It’s not infallible…it’s not on par with the belief of the assumption.

Dialogue doesn’t mean watering something down…but our bishops have had a habit of acting like its just a handful of folks who take issue with that teaching…when its more like a handful of folks who have no trouble following it to the hilt.

A better sales job is in order here…

 

[frommi]

IMHO Person A needs supervision and no authority over others. Legal action might be taken in this case. If no legal action is taken then let the Pope keep him in line with very close supervision.

Person A is breaking both God’s Laws and human laws and needs to be punished for those transgressions. The old saying is “put under the Jail” I believe.

Person B needs to be fired and have no authority over a souls salvation and safety. Eternity is just that forever and God will not be mocked.

Person B is breaking Gods commandments and not mans as far as we know. So his punishment is to come from the Church and God.

I’m sorry…exactly what commandments of God is person B (Bishop Gumbleton) breaking?

 

[frommi]

Just matters of Faith, Morals and on all matters of Church discipline and governance of the Church.

All other statements may be ignored.

Sounds like you subscribe to the 'nobody breaks Canon Law better than a Pope" argument.

And I never said ignore anything…

However, one wonders how people would react if ‘hypothetically’ a future pope were to tackle some of these more difficult issues from a different perspective. I’m not advocating for it…but I have a feeling people would be saying things like “Oh…why can’t this pope be more like…so and so”.

We have bishops for a reason…the church is fully present in each diocese…

And I still say…if some of these bishops are so awful and horrendous…why haven’t popes used their supreme and binding authority more frequently to ship them off to non-existent sees?

 

[fix]

It’s not infallible…it’s not on par with the belief of the assumption.

It is infallible by the universal and ordinary magisterium.

Dialogue doesn’t mean watering something down…but our bishops have had a habit of acting like its just a handful of folks who take issue with that teaching…when its more like a handful of folks who have no trouble following it to the hilt.

A better sales job is in order here…

No, a better job in submitting to the authority of Christ is needed.

 

[elijahson]

Pax tecum!

No that is definitely not correct theology and Gumbleton should be publicly reprimanded by the other US bishops.

In Christ,
Rand

I am sorry, but i cannot see him being reprimanded by the USCCB…He should be, but i don’t see it happening

 

[frommi]

It is infallible by the universal and ordinary magisterium.

No, a better job in submitting to the authority of Christ is needed.

Yeah…Jesus was always really concerned about condoms…missed that biblical chapter.

Look…the teaching on that particular matter is sound…what someone like Bishop Gumbleton is pointing out is that Bishops and Cardinals had a different opinion on the matter after looking into it quite thoroughly…

I mean, if the compelling majority argument is pushed aside…its going to take more than canon law to get everyone to listen.

And I’ve never understood the speed with which people are ready to push aside other Catholics and not spend time going over the reasons for a viable church teaching.

The problems people have with a Bishop like Tom Gumbleton is that he’s speaking the truth here…not that it takes a bishop to point this out…but a lot of people DO NOT FOLLOW HUMANE VITAE…that doesn’t mean the teaching should be changed…but it also does not mean we should run around with our heads in the sand and act like everyone is all good with it either.

 

[frommi]

I am sorry, but i cannot see him being reprimanded by the USCCB…He should be, but i don’t see it happening

If the USCCB won’t reprimand the Great Fabu of Lincoln for not following the Dallas Charter…I don’t think they are going to get involved in the goings on of a retired member.

 

[KathleenElsie]

I’m sorry…exactly what commandments of God is person B (Bishop Gumbleton) breaking?

From Guide to a good confession:

1ST commandment can be considered broken of I have failed to perform my duties toward God. In this case teaching against the Church moral code.

2ND commandment can be broken if the vows to teach Church doctrine are not followed.

4Th for priests, parents and others in authority Have I given others bad example?

5Th commandment How many persons did I lead into sin?

These are just a few of the many ways that Gods Commandments/LAWS can be broken by priests and lay persons alike.

Don’t get me wrong, casting the first stone requires one to be sinless and none of us are. But, you put out the situation and asked for our opinions. That is just what I did, give my opinion. In both A & B,s case I would and will pray hard for their immortal souls just as I pray for mine and others souls.

God Bless

 

[fix]

Yeah…Jesus was always really concerned about condoms…missed that biblical chapter.

He said heaven and earth will pass away before one letter of the law. He is concerned for our well being. It is we who incorrectly diminish the horror of sin. We dismiss what we do not find convenient.

Look…the teaching on that particular matter is sound…what someone like Bishop Gumbleton is pointing out is that Bishops and Cardinals had a different opinion on the matter after looking into it quite thoroughly…

Christ speaks through Pope and bishops in union with him. There will always be dissenters.

I mean, if the compelling majority argument is pushed aside…its going to take more than canon law to get everyone to listen.

Many walked away from Christ when He was on the earth. Truth does not change because the majority do not like it.

And I’ve never understood the speed with which people are ready to push aside other Catholics and not spend time going over the reasons for a viable church teaching.

I have never understood why Catholics who claim to be faithful refuse to accept that Christ is the authority behind the Church. He has spoken and many will not accept. Why?

The problems people have with a Bishop like Tom Gumbleton is that he’s speaking the truth here…not that it takes a bishop to point this out…but a lot of people DO NOT FOLLOW HUMANE VITAE…that doesn’t mean the teaching should be changed…but it also does not mean we should run around with our heads in the sand and act like everyone is all good with it either.

Then the bishop should seek to explain the teaching. Look, the problem is not one of comprehension the problem is one of submission. Many do not understand all manner of Church teachings, yet they do not clamor for “change”. Why?

 

[frommi]

Christ speaks through Pope and bishops in union with him. There will always be dissenters.
Many walked away from Christ when He was on the earth. Truth does not change because the majority do not like it.

I have never understood why Catholics who claim to be faithful refuse to accept that Christ is the authority behind the Church. He has spoken and many will not accept. Why?

I missed Jesus’ retirement memo when he decided to make the pope his sole mouthpiece…even though all bishops are vicars of Christ.

I’m pretty sure all Catholics accept that Jesus Christ is the head of this church…it’s only a few who decide to put the pope ahead of him.

 

[fix]

I missed Jesus’ retirement memo when he decided to make the pope his sole mouthpiece…even though all bishops are vicars of Christ.

I’m pretty sure all Catholics accept that Jesus Christ is the head of this church…it’s only a few who decide to put the pope ahead of him.

The Pope has said contraception is intrinsically wrong. The Church has always taught that. The Pope has the authority to interpret natural law. Does Christ now contradict Himself?

In “Humanae Vitae” the Pope taught, with the divine assistance he enjoys (cf. “Lumen Gentium”, n. 25a), what the Church’s ordinary Magisterium had always held to be true and right, and what had been reconfirmed by the extraordinary Magisterium of Vatican II. The arguments of those who claim to pass judgment on the basis of their knowledge do not stand up against this Magisterium: between the two teachings there is a substantial difference of quality and not only of degree. The teaching of “Humanae Vitae” is Magisterium - though ordinary - which contains decisions belonging to a divinely established authority (cf. canon 331; “Lumen Gentium” nn. 18a, 20c, 22b, 23c; “Christus Dominus” n. 2a) and exercised in order to interpret and teach (as in our case) the moral norms of human conduct. If he were not the Pope, he would lose his legitimate power and the intrinsic reason for his ministry; at most he could carry out a scholarly magisterium, which, however, would not be of use to the Church and to which he has not been appointed by the Church’s Founder; he would lack the supernatural “virtus” of assisting and confirming his brethren in the faith and in the moral law (cf. Lk. 22:32, Mt. 16:29; Vatican I, Dogm. Const. “Pastor Aeternus”, DS 3074).

It is Jesus himself who wanted the Pope to have a Magisterium of authority, having entrusted him with the mission of teaching men the truths to be believed and the duties to be fulfilled. In promulgating “Humanae Vitae” Paul VI acted within and by force of this Magisterium. He proposed anew “a teaching which is based on the natural law as illuminated and enriched by divine Revelation.” Paul VI therefore says: “Let no Catholic be heard to assert that the interpretation of the natural moral law is outside the competence of the church’s Magisterium. It is in fact indisputable, as our Predecessors have many times declared (Pius XI, St. Pius X, Pius XII and John XXIII are cited), that Jesus Christ, when he communicated his divine power to Peter and the other Apostles and sent them to teach all nations his commandments (cf. Mt. 28:18029), constituted them as the authentic guardians and interpreters of the whole moral law, not only, that is, of the law of the Gospel but also of the natural law, the reason being that the natural law declares the will of God, and its faithful observance is necessary for men’s eternal salvation” (“Humanae Vitae”, n. 4).

Archbishop Vincenzo Fagiolo, President of the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts, discusses the authority of the Magisterium to interpret the natural law