Cardinal Marx: Pope’s Line in Amoris Laetitia is “Very Clear” (National Catholic Register/EWTN)

[Randolph]

I am also not questioning anyone’s motives.

As to the primary confusion, I believe that many of those that are confused are confused as to how the Pope can disagree with them on an issue they obviously feel strongly about. Given their level of certainty, and their faith in the Church, they can not understand how the Church could teach as it is. That is my sense, anyway.

It believe it’s a doctrinal issue–not a disagreement with Pope Francis. We agree to disagree. Thank you for your thoughts and for a respectful dialogue.

 

[pnewton]

Doctrines are divine truths declared by the Church. They are to be believed and faithfully followed by all Catholics. No one has the authority to contradict or undermine them. That includes all popes and bishops. The Church belongs to Christ and must be obedient to Christ. If the Church departs from Christ and His teachings, the Church ceases to be herself.

No one is disagreeing with this. However, to say what that doctrine is, when it has not be defined and right now there is disagreement on what is doctrinally permissible only begs the question.

Another way to look at the disagreement over Amoris Laetitia, at least for us in the pews, is to consider the level at which we see disagreement. There is an impressive array of intellect on both sides of this issue of deciding who can and cannot receive communion. While we may be convinced with moral certainty that we understand this, we should be slow to frustration on those who do not see this as we do. I like to discuss this with others for the sake of learning not just what others think, but how they think. It helps me clarifying real points of disagreement versus rhetoric, and thus easy to clarify my own thoughts.

Agree to disagree indeed.

 

[Pulvis]

Archbishop Fernandez is one of the leading theological aides to the pope, who last year was appointed to a special commission inside the Synod of Bishops…

“The pope goes slow because he wants to be sure that the changes have a deep impact. The slow pace is necessary to ensure the effectiveness of the changes. He knows there are those hoping that the next pope will be turn everything back around. If you go slowly it’s more difficult to turn things back. He makes this clear when he says ‘time is greater than space.’”

“The pope must have his reasons, because he knows very well what he’s doing. He must have an objective that we don’t understand yet. You have to realize that he is aiming at a reform that is irreversible. If one day he should intuit that he’s running out of time and he doesn’t have enough time to do what the Spirit is asking him, you can be sure he will speed up."This quote from Archbishop Fernandez is a clear statement of the Pope’s intentions - led by the Spirit.

The AL change in terms of for lay Catholics in new marriages is one the Pope wants all the faithful to come and embrace. He is giving this time for complete discernment.

Too many Catholics seem afraid of where the Pope and bishops are taking the Church. I don’t understand that fear. If one is Catholic then one believes in the inability of the Pope to teach error on matters of faith and morals.

The second paragraph gets to the point. If the Pope feels his time is limited he will speed up what the Spirit is having him reveal. Perhaps in an official ex cathedra statement? If indeed he defines that remarried Catholics can receive the Eucharist based on their conscious and confessor how could any believing Catholic not accept that? Not accepting the more complete doctrine would be a Protestant act.

If this change, this new direction is guided by the Holy Spirit, why are they concerned about a reversal? Why not simply declare, Ex Cathedra His new teaching?
The going slow analogy reminds me of the Frog and the pot!

 

[Yeoman]

I wonder what the *papa emeritus * thinks about it, though…

Making it all the sadder that Pope Benedict chose to step down. I still don’t understand that.

 

[Thomas_White]

I agree that it is not a “majority rules” situation. That said, I think there is significance to be found in the fact that the majority of those with teaching authority appear to support the Pope’s teaching, which also appears to be in line with the sensus fidelium.

Sensus fidelium (sense of the faithful) means the universal consent and acceptance by the faithful. Isn’t this precisely what is missing here?

 

[Thomas_White]

Making it all the sadder that Pope Benedict chose to step down. I still don’t understand that.

In ‘Last Testament: In His Own Words’, a recently published book by Pope Benedict XVI and Peter Sewald, the pope emeritus reveals that with his advancing years and declining energy, he believed he could no longer meet the full duties and heavy responsibilities required of a pope at this critical stage of history. He believes he made the right decision.

 

[pnewton]

Sensus fidelium (sense of the faithful) means the universal consent and acceptance by the faithful. Isn’t this precisely what is missing here?

I would say mostly universal is okay, as there will always be some dissent. But yes, you have a good point. This is missing here.

 

[TMC]

Sensus fidelium (sense of the faithful) means the universal consent and acceptance by the faithful. Isn’t this precisely what is missing here?

I don’t think Sensus Fidelium requires unanimity among the faithful. I think that that sense of the vast majority of the faithful is that the Pope is correct and moving the Church in the right direction. Of course, that is only my sense of the broader sense, so I may be wrong.

 

[Thomas_White]

I don’t think Sensus Fidelium requires unanimity among the faithful. I think that that sense of the vast majority of the faithful is that the Pope is correct and moving the Church in the right direction. Of course, that is only my sense of the broader sense, so I may be wrong.

I don’t know either and was just pointing out that the Church is not there yet. It does appear that footnote 351 together with the letter to Arg. bishops is clear enough, and that the focus thus ought to be to attempt to understand how AL could be reconciled with traditional Church teaching.

It would further seem that the silence of Pope Francis means that he believes he knows what he is doing, but the sense is nevertheless that this is risky for the Church. We see this on the many threads on the topic of AL, and it would seem the faithful really need some type of definitive clarification.