Cardinal Muller: no need to clarify Amoris Laetitia [CC]

[Randolph]

[BIBLEDRB][/BIBLEDRB]

They are not strawmen arguments. The phrase I quoted spoke of condemnation forever. But the only way people are condomned forever is if they themselves dont change the thing that brings condemnation. The idea that there can be an expiry date to mortal sin apart from actual repetance is what I was referring to. Sorry if I misunderstood the context.

The other issue iabout the false dichotmoy? No! The mercy of prelates and God is not identical. The mercy of prelates is that of God only if they are acting on his behalf and according to his will not according to their own will. They are servants. Otherwise, they are doing their own thing. If a prelate decides to forgive you now for murder that you have announced you are planning to commit tomorrow, for example, whether they are pope or parish priest, that is their own thing. Not God’s mercy. Because Gods mercy will not save you until you repent in your heart.

The problem I had with this whole thing is that some essentially claim that they can do this for adultery. You don’t have to repent and promise to stop. Just go and receive communion. Well, in that case, can I sleep with my boyfriend who I love and go for communion? Why sare some sinners called to make sacrificies and others are treated as if the cross is too big for them? This is my whole confusion and struggle with this affair. I don’t see how a pope can chose to extend mercy to an unrepetant sinner unless he first claims to change the reality of the sin or the call to repentance. But the pope cam do nrither of those things! Even if we feel very sorry for other people’s suffering, are there not limits that arise from the fact that we are not God? That’s my struggle. I find it hard to believe in a church that contradicts itself so blatantly. If our doctrines are true, then there should be no debate about the obligations of persons who are in a second marriage without being sure that the first is invalid. It is the same obligation for us all. To live chastely. But suddenly there is confusion about what was always so clear. Why if our church is the true church?

Thank you. We want and need God’s mercy–which nurtures and sustains our souls. But the converse is also particularly true. We need to guard ourselves against man-made, false mercy which often disguises itself with good intentions and empty promises. False mercy harms us, and pushes us further from God.

Popes, bishops, priests, theologians, you, others and I are humans. Humans make mistakes and sin. When we do, we need to do our part to repent and to promise to sin no more. In God’s infinite love and mercy, He will grant us forgiveness.

 

[Chipper]

No one is lost forever. That is not too difficult to understand.

What???

2 Thess. 1:8-9
"…to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction,…"

The Holy Father is only applying moral theology that is used universally to the problem of these irregular marriages. For example, it is a basic principle that grave matter does not equate to mortal sin. Grave matter is necessary for mortal sin, but so is full knowledge and deliberate consent.

You just cited exceptions that aren’t there. Read it again. It says everyone, in “whatever situation”, ….“everyone” does not mean “some”, as you are citing.
“Whatever situation” does not include exceptions that you cited.

If one is confused by this document, it should present not barrier. There is no obligation on the part of anyone to seek any spiritual direction from a priest on this matter, as outlined in Amoris Laetitia. Just don’t do it.

I can’t make heads or tails out of this last statement.

 

[Ginny89]

This is an odd position for a Catholic. Do you believe in the primacy of Peter or apostolic succession? These “prelates” as you put it are the Pope, in this case, and the bishops. In other words, they *are *the Church. I quoted what Jesus said. I would think that would be sufficient. You are entitled to your opinion, but I have to say “No” to your opinion, though I will not add the exclamation point, but simply trust the promise Jesus gave us.

I never said the second two things. You have given a lot of rhetoric that is not being argued or proposed here. That is why I say it is a straw man. If I claimed that you, or “some people” were claiming that those in irregular situations were beyond mercy, wouldn’t you cry foul as well? That’s all I am saying. It is best to honestly represent another’s position and not inflate, extend or distort it.

As to my opinion on this, I note you are new here, so I guess you have not followed a lot of the previous conversations. They are all still available though.

Of course I believe the prelates are the church just as I am. But that does not mean they are inseparable. They remain individuals who can act on their own in a manner contrary to Gods will. For example, when they sin or abuse their authority, those actions are their own, not the church’s and not God’s.

I wasnt talking about you or any one here in the quote you have referenced in your second point. I am talking about this whole debate in the church not in this forum and I am talking in particular about those high prelates who push tbat the remarried can approach ommunion without true repetance. They are the ones who have given scandal to my, yes, admittedly weak faith. They give me the impression that they are not truly convinced that the doctrines of the church are true. Because if they were, theyd never propose that we say with our lips that the remarriage is adultery, but with our actions in permitting communion without repentance, we say that we dont really believe that it is adultery after all. Some of us are left feeling things are not as serious as we have been led to believe after all. Things like mortal sin. And if they who have spent all their lives in church are not that convinced, then it makes people like me have doubts.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Yet. As most national conferences haven’t completed implementation, it is too early to claim there is not a unified interpretation on this process. In September, the USCCB issued a report that said the bishops wanted to go slow and careful, and most diocese have this under study in committed at this time. Sure some conferences have moved faster. Also, I think it a mistake to think there needs to be a unified implementation. Economic resources, the number of Catholics per priest, and the prevailing culture can all impact how extensive this implementation will need to be, how detailed, and how quickly it is needed.

I like that the US is being careful in this and that the bishops, even though they are competent in their own diocese, are collaborating.

Ok, but not only have divergent opinions appeared along the US Bishops but among Bishops and Priests around the world.

I wonder how common it is where a divorced and remarried person is allowed to receive Communion in one parish, but they go to another parish, where the priest or Bishop may have different interpretation of Amoris Laetitia than they did in a previous parish, and that person is not allowed to receive Holy Communion there.

This is very concerning.

Again, if somebody believes the door has been opened for Communion and somebody doesn’t, they can’t both be correct.

 

[Pulvis]

A. L. will be argued ad infinitum until a definitive clarification is issued. One may argue that + Mueller has had the final say, but the actual events occurring in the Church across the world say otherwise. There was a time in the Church, not so long ago, where everyone was on the same page as far as doctrine is considered. But since the upheaval of the 60’s and 70’s, not so much.
Ambiguity breeds confusion. Confusion breeds doubt. Doubt opens the door to satan.

Holy Mary, Mother of God, Pray for our Bishops, Priests and Religious. Pray for our Holy Father.

 

[Brendan]

I wonder how common it is where a divorced and remarried person is allowed to receive Communion in one parish, but they go to another parish, where the priest or Bishop may have different interpretation of Amoris Laetitia than they did in a previous parish, and that person is not allowed to receive Holy Communion there.* .

My thoughts*exactly. What is considered an act of Mercy in one diocese isconsidered an act of Sacrilege in another, even if it was the same couple and the same priest.

Is it too much to ask for the Church to make clear distinctions between the two.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Also, I think it a mistake to think there needs to be a unified implementation. Economic resources, the number of Catholics per priest, and the prevailing culture can all impact how extensive this implementation will need to be, how detailed, and how quickly it is needed.

Indeed. When one is working across dioceses – and even more across cultures – one sees that, in fact, implementations are not uniform. And needed solutions are realised in various ways.

That aside, when the matter is that of a pastoral solution requiring discernment and the application of pastoral judgment…there will be variance from one priest to another. That is normal and I have experienced it across years, above all since the promulgation of the 1983 Code.

 

[FollowChrist34]

For those who have a moment, I heartily recommend discerning the flow of this piece.

catholicworldreport.com/Item/5337/catholics_and_the_present_confusion.aspx

Well said indeed. (aka “truth”)
:tiphat:

 

[Randolph]

A. L. will be argued ad infinitum until a definitive clarification is issued. One may argue that + Mueller has had the final say, but the actual events occurring in the Church across the world say otherwise. There was a time in the Church, not so long ago, where everyone was on the same page as far as doctrine is considered. But since the upheaval of the 60’s and 70’s, not so much.
Ambiguity breeds confusion. Confusion breeds doubt. Doubt opens the door to satan.

Holy Mary, Mother of God, Pray for our Bishops, Priests and Religious. Pray for our Holy Father.

I agree with you. After all the spins are spun, and attempts at distractions are exhausted…

The big elephant staring at everyone in the Church is still the ambiguity in AL that have already resulted in confusion and division within the Church. This elephant is not going away by ignoring it. Unfortunately, this elephant will only get bigger/worse as time goes by. Until this elephant is effectively gone, it will continue to weigh heavily in the Church.

 

[graciew]

I agree with you. After all the spins are spun, and attempts at distractions are exhausted…

The big elephant staring at everyone in the Church is still the ambiguity in AL that have already resulted in confusion and division within the Church. This elephant is not going away by ignoring it. Unfortunately, this elephant will only get bigger/worse as time goes by. Until this elephant is effectively gone, it will continue to weigh heavily in the Church.

There is no elephant staring at me. And no elephants around.
Just mosquitoes and not too many.
Why an elephant?

I take for granted you have read AL,btw

 

[Randolph]

There is no elephant staring at me. And no elephants around.
Just mosquitoes and not too many.
Why an elephant?

I take for granted you have read AL,btw

Lol. I hope you are familiar with the usage of analogy. And Yes, I read AL.

 

[graciew]

Lol. I hope you are familiar with the usage of analogy. And Yes, I read AL.

Yes,I am,Randolph. My mosquitos were literal btw…( ugghhh) And there is no literal nor metaphorical elephant around.
I really wonder why you see an elephant I do not see.
And why an elephant…

 

[rfournier103]

So…

Divorced and remarried Catholics may NOT receive the Holy Eucharist?

Is that what I am to take away from this?

 

[TCEL]

So…

Divorced and remarried Catholics may NOT receive the Holy Eucharist?

Is that what I am to take away from this?

I’ll go out on a limb and say I think that is Cardinal Muller’s stance.

 

[FollowChrist34]

I agree with you. After all the spins are spun, and attempts at distractions are exhausted…

The big elephant staring at everyone in the Church is still the ambiguity in AL that have already resulted in confusion and division within the Church. This elephant is not going away by ignoring it. Unfortunately, this elephant will only get bigger/worse as time goes by. Until this elephant is effectively gone, it will continue to weigh heavily in the Church.

Right. It’s pretty hard to find the lost sheep, or even tend the ones right under your nose* for that matter if you’re convinced you can’t discern your way out of a paper bag, let alone the Gospel. How Descartes must be loving this. Though I do think the elephant is there, very real, and, alas, not particularly new, open or flowing. The confusion is the smoke and mirrors. If you don’t believe me, conduct a little experiment - try sticking to your discernment of the flow of the Gospel and see how far you get. Maybe google the definition of ‘rigid’ while you are waiting for a response.

*update: 99 lost - 1 found in theory

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I’ll go out on a limb and say I think that is Cardinal Muller’s stance.

In which case there are a few bishops and priests out there who need to print immediate retractions and "whoops, my bad, sorry people. I was the one who misunderstood and thought that a new way etc. meant going outside authentic Catholic teaching because I thought that since we hadn’t allowed people in this situation to receive, the only ‘new way’ could be ‘allow them to receive’. But I was wrong! Sorry for the confusion!"

 

[graciew]

who need to print immediate retractions

Who is demanding this or even asking for it,Tantum ergo?

 

[Randolph]

Yes,I am,Randolph. My mosquitos were literal btw…( ugghhh) And there is no literal nor metaphorical elephant around.
I really wonder why you see an elephant I do not see.
And why an elephant…

The (metaphorical idiom) elephant represents the ambiguity in AL which the Dubia seek clarity on. The ambiguity has already resulted in confusion and division in the Church. If you have further questions, I suggest you read previous posts in this thread.

 

[Randolph]

Right. It’s pretty hard to find the lost sheep, or even tend the ones right under your nose* for that matter if you’re convinced you can’t discern your way out of a paper bag, let alone the Gospel. How Descartes must be loving this. Though I do think the elephant is there, very real, and, alas, not particularly new, open or flowing. The confusion is the smoke and mirrors. If you don’t believe me, conduct a little experiment - try sticking to your discernment of the flow of the Gospel and see how far you get. Maybe google the definition of ‘rigid’ while you are waiting for a response.

*update: 99 lost - 1 found in theory

How nice? So wondeful… Thank you for your contribution to this thread…

 

[JPUSC]

Quote: Originally Posted by Chipper

AL 297 “…No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel! Here I am not speaking only of the divorced and remarried, but of everyone, in whatever situation they find themselves…”

No one is lost forever. That is not too difficult to understand.
The Holy Father is only applying moral theology that is used universally to the problem of these irregular marriages. For example, it is a basic principle that grave matter does not equate to mortal sin. Grave matter is necessary for mortal sin, but so is full knowledge and deliberate consent.

If one is confused by this document, it should present not barrier. There is no obligation on the part of anyone to seek any spiritual direction from a priest on this matter, as outlined in Amoris Laetitia. Just don’t do it.

1034 Jesus often speaks of “Gehenna” of “the unquenchable fire” reserved for those who to the end of their lives refuse to believe and be converted, where both soul and body can be lost. 612 Jesus solemnly proclaims that he "will send his angels, and they will gather . . . all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire,"613 and that he will pronounce the condemnation: "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire!"614

1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, **“eternal fire.”**615 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.

Catechism of the Catholic Church
vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_P2O.HTM