Cardinal Cupich says "discern truth" - WHAT?

  • Thread starter Thread starter oppositeman13
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Vadne said:
Why bother teaching theology? Just tell the students to do whatever the pope says. No need for school or theologians.
Click to expand...
You are partly correct in your irony.
I would think inexpert laypersons should usually follow their PP when confused.

Theologians, and their disciples, are surely capable of more and usually suffer less personal confusion on the bigger issues.

We are all called to try and reduce our confusions to certainty but by different means according to our state in life surely.
 
Last edited:
Good time to remind readers of the thread who come looking for sound Catholic doctrine: the divorced and remarried may not receive Communion unless they are sexually abstinent.
 
Lay readers who do not have the skills or guage the extremity of the Remnant website would, I suggest, be wise to take their material with a large dose of salt and maybe think twice before postying it elsewhere as normative Catholic views.

The Lifesite News site is more subtle.
As others have noted, over time it becomes clear its reporting is consistently biased and so somewhat unprofessional.
 
Last edited:
then you have 2 churches which both can’t be Catholic. This is ok with you? Again, I say the tragedy of what has happened is that many will believe in a false church thereby putting their salvation in jeopardy.
 
Last edited:
I would really hope that people who want “sound Catholic doctrine” would not receive it from posters here. Those with questions should consult their priest, but if you have spent years tying your life in knots, do not expect easy and quick solutions. That is not what Amoris Laetitia is about.
 
Why? I understand your view, but unless you are here simply to vent I suggest most people here want to explore options by means of well argued positions or by sourcing agreed impartial authorities.

So how about making your case rather than reposting repeated assertions that speak only to the converted but not the undecided.
 
Last edited:
A very broad range of comments. About an hour ago I began reading this thread - trying to consider all the posts before I post one here . . . I think the reading got to my eyes. 👀

@pnewton : While I really am trying my best to get used to the “NEW” CAF , I don’t know if I will ever be able to get used to seeing your CAF Username without that little signature clip of the kitten attacking the hand as it was closing in on the delete button (lol) .
FWIW , a slightly different perspective which still pertains to the topic:

Of the four “Dubia” Cardinals, at least the way the MSM spun it, detractors always seemed to imply that Vatican ire was focused more on Cardinal Burke , than the other three ; kind of like they had painted a bigger bull’s eye on him. Among the comments here, some of the more speculative types suggested that Pope Francis “knows” , and posited how certain marital and non marital/adulterous (take your pick of terms) situations, irregularities etc would be played out or were intended to be lived out according to Amoris Letitia. A considerable part of what was being expressed/speculated in more than a few posts are abstract ideas. We could all benefit from a good concrete example of the effects of Amoris Letitia.

They seemed to look at Cardinal Burke first yet it was another of the “Dubia” Cardinals - Cardinal Carlo Caffarra (God rest that holy man’s soul) who provided us with just such a, concrete, real-life, example. A January 16, 2017 article from CNA/EWTN News entitled Cardinal Caffarra Explains the Reasons Behind the Dubia reported on an interview which Cardinal Caffarra had given to an Italian daily two days beforehand. He said he had received a letter from a priest saying that
“In spiritual direction and in confession I don’t know what to say” when confronted by penitents who wish to receive Communion despite their adulterous situation, and cite the Pope in their defence.
Click to expand...
I’ll post a snippet from the article with this quote in a little more context below (or else post will exceed permissible amount of characters).
 
Last edited:
Here it is with a little more context, from : Cardinal Caffarra Explains the Reasons Behind the Dubia
The cardinal noted that scandal on the part of the faithful had been growing, “as though we comported ourselves like the dogs who did not bark,” alluding to Isaiah 56:10, in which the prophet says the Lord’s watchmen “are all mute dogs, they cannot bark; dreaming, lying down, loving to slumber.”

He also added that division in the Church “is the cause of the letter, not its effect.”

Cardinal Caffarra pointed to the example of a pastor who had written him saying that “In spiritual direction and in confession I don’t know what to say” when confronted by penitents who wish to receive Communion despite their adulterous situation, and cite the Pope in their defence.

“The situation of many pastors of souls, I mean above all parish priests, is this,” the cardinal continued: “there is on their shoulders a burden too hard to bear.”

Cardinal Caffarra charged that speaking of too great a division between doctrine and pastoral practice is a grave problem: “To think pastoral practice is not founded and rooted in doctrine signifies that the foundation and root of pastoral practice is arbitrary. A Church which pays little attention to doctrine is not a more pastoral Church, but a more ignorant Church.”

He continued, “When I hear it said that this is only a pastoral change, and not a doctrinal one, or that the commandment prohibiting adultery is a purely positive law which can be changed (and I think no righteous person can think this), this signifies that yes a triangle has generally three sides, but that it is possible to construct one with four sides. That is, I say, an absurdity.”
Click to expand...
The whole article is informative, and well worth the read.

This isn’t speculation guys, it’s what is happening. I’m going to continue to both pray for the repose of the soul of Cardinal Caffarra and to ask for his intercession.
 
Last edited:
??? - what don’t you understand??? I will say it again - there can’t exist one church with two different teachings on the same issue. You are skipping over the fundamentals which I stated above. You have already gotten to the point where you believe that this is sound teaching. If so there is an appropriate way for Pope Francis to go about this, which he didn’t do. If you missed this earlier I will post again what what Dr. Edward Feser, a catholic philosopher and teacher states - perhaps you should read his complete article - link below

“Papal teaching, then, including exercises of the extraordinary Magisterium, cannot contradict Scripture, Tradition, or previous binding papal teaching. Nor can it introduce utter novelties. Popes have authority only to preserve and interpret what they have received. They can draw out the implications of previous teaching or clarify it where it is ambiguous. They can make formally binding what was already informally taught. But they cannot reverse past teaching and they cannot make up new doctrines out of whole cloth.”

http://edwardfeser.blogspot.ca/2015/11/papal-fallibility.html
 
Last edited:
I certainly know of clergy who are using Amoris Laetitia as grounds to comment that they can no longer counsel people to abstain from sexual relations when divorced and remarried, out of obedience to the pope.

But again, Pope Bergoglio has plenty of time to trash Catholics he doesn’t like with regularity, and to give airplane interviews…but no time at all to address the formal dubia of four of his cardinals, and the on the record opposing interpretations of his ghostwritten document from ordinaries of dioceses and archdioceses.
 
Blue_Horizon said:
It would be intentional obtuseness to imply Pope Francis denies objective evil still remains.
Click to expand...
Nobody knows what the Holy Father denies until he answers the dubia or issues an official public interpretion of Amoris Laetitia. Until that time, my belief is semper unique et ab omnibus; in other words, I’ll take my lead from Jesus, the Church Fathers and every Pope until Pope Francis caused this confusion.
 
Vadne said:
I certainly know of clergy who are using Amoris Laetitia as grounds to comment that they can no longer counsel people to abstain from sexual relations when divorced and remarried, out of obedience to the pope.
Click to expand...
Those clergy appear to be misguided. AL recognizes the objective wrong and the right goal for persons in irregular situations. Nothing in it dissuades a priest from explaining that.

[As an aside, and the only part with which there is a basis for disagreement, is its clear implication that communion might be available to some of those (a small minority) who are not pursuing abstinence.
 
Last edited:
We are supposed to, required to, expected to, even demanded to form our consciences well. In the cases of certain members of the hierarchy, I note a distinct lack of emphasis on that aspect.

Therefore, I offer daily prayer for the hierarchy.
 
I agree that this is not what Amoris Laetitia is about, but there are those who do expect easy and quick solutions, and depending on geography, can reasonably expect to receive them. For example, the Maltese bishops have actually offered a quite easy and quick solution as it appears that their policy/guidelines do not even follow the most liberal reading of the exhortation. Also, the bishop who offered Mass and then invited divorced and remarried to Holy Communion seemed to skip the accompaniment and discernment portion of the process. That certainly is not what Amoris Laetitia is about.
 
Last edited:
NeedImprovement said:
In spiritual direction and in confession I don’t know what to say” when confronted by penitents who wish to receive Communion despite their adulterous situation, and cite the Pope in their defence.

I’ll post a snippet from the article with this quote in a little more context below (or else post will exceed permissible amount of characters).
Click to expand...
I know what my response would be. I would suggest that first the read Amoris Laetitia. It is a wonderful teaching document. Furthermore, it does not (edit) say what people thinks it says. Starting the process described in it between penitent and priest does not start with going to communion. It is a journey of spiritual direction. Reading here, I really get the impression many people have not read this document. One really should be very familiar with something you have a “strong opinion” on.

And its good to have you on board. Sorry about the cat.
 
Last edited:
oppositeman13 said:
??? - what don’t you understand??? I will say it again - there can’t exist one church with two different teachings on the same issue.
Click to expand...
I believe it can, or at least with more than one opinion where as to what teaching exists. Take the dormition of Mary. Did she die? Was that the end of her earthly life? Some teach it was. Yet when the doctrine of the Assumption was defined, this question was not answered. So we can also believe she was assumed without death.

The Church does no disintegrate over this not being defined. The only danger, which exists in all denominations are those that lack the charity to allow others an opinion that the Church allows because it does not conform to their own. That is why Protestants split ever so often. It is not the differences, but the lack of charity toward others. All of this, “I am of Cupich” and “I am of Burke” exited in the time of St. Paul, except it was Cephas and Apollo.
 
Last edited:
Particular questions related to the Assumption do not involve the danger of sinful actions.

Reception of Communion unworthily does.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top