Yes!Agreed, it may be the trajectory over the coming weeks, months, years or even decades but we must always be ready to give witness, with lamps ready to light at a moment’s notice. The Saints endured much worse than indifferentism, insults and ad hominem attacks.
The intellectual argument used in supporting the liberal interpretation of AL can be used to justify access to Communion for anyone on the basis of their own subjective conscience This is in effect what the Maltese Bishop’s document is saying in suggesting that private conscience has the final say. Whether they realise or intended it or not, we’re already seeing the signs of the new “teaching” getting out of control in San Diego and Malta. While the “liberals” and “conservatives” are bickering, the “liberals” themselves equally can’t even agree on how far to interpret AL.
When I converted to Catholicism, I remember at the start wondering what to actually do with my faith once I’d found it. In a way, I should probably be happy for this situation; I’ve now got something to keep me busy with teaching for the next 50-60 years
I do not know that sex outside of marriage is invariably a mortal sin. There are three conditions for a sin to be a mortal and full or deliberate consent is one of them. Manifest grave sin is objective–but a person might not be subjectively culpable, as described in AL 305 and note 351. I do not see that this contradicts either existing doctrine or the CCC.
If this is allowed, then what’s to prevent a practicing gay Catholic from receiving Communion after “examination of conscience”?
This is what makes the situation more distressing, but we must remember that he has not yet formally come down on either side of the argument. We’re construing meaning and intention from actions and the words of subordinates. In that case it’s important to always remain respectful and charitable. If we’re only good people in situations when it’s easy to be good, then we’re not being good people
You present a reasonable position based on the quotations you give. But we must remember that before AL the Church has always taught that certain actions were intrinsically evil actions, or grave matter. See CCC 1650 for the specific reference to adultery (i.e. sex outside of a valid marriage).
No, you are not crazy… Conscience, discernment and pastoral accompaniment are great concept and tool when they are understood and applied correctly and faithfully to the Catholic faith. But I am afraid nowaday, they are being used cleverly by some to bypass and ultimately undermine the teaching of Christ and the Magisterium.
It doesn’t help when bishops and cardinals ramp up the rhetoric. One used the words heresy and schism.
Sexual addiction is extremely powerful, from the neurochemisty alone. Will a prolonged separation from a spouse result in sexual sin? Very possibly, though since addiction is not just about chemistry but life style and habits, there is at least that difference. I appreciate your caution though. My own philosophy is to accept no excuses or rationalizations for myself, but be understanding of these same factors in others. I do not mind being over-judgmental when looking at me. I alone in humanity have that right to that particular judgment until the day God sets me straight.
To be fair, if anyone (especially a bishop or cardinal, who have more knowledge than lay people) believed that something was heretical or schismatic, wouldn’t they, in honor and duty bound, be obliged to state that?
If I were to venture the guess as to what clarification, if any, comes forth, my guess would be it will be over this issue. The Catholic Church has always used the criteria of objective, or assumed objective state, do determine whether one can receive communion. However, I do not agree that it is a doctrinal necessity. Only actual mortal sin kills the spirit, and thus the ability to receive the grace of God.
well, I think he’s going to have to come down on one side or the other eventually.This is what makes the situation more distressing, but we must remember that he has not yet formally come down on either side of the argument. We’re construing meaning and intention from actions and the words of subordinates. In that case it’s important to always remain respectful and charitable. If we’re only good people in situations when it’s easy to be good, then we’re not being good people
As to what the Church teaches; everything must be read in the light of the constant teaching of the Church, in harmony with the Gospel and consistent in doctrine and tradition. The Church has gone through many difficulties in the past: the Western Schism, the Arian Heresy, The Reformation, The Islamic Expansion. Remember, people have been predicting the downfall of the Church since it was just a handful of dejected people in the upper room after the execution of their leader
I’d suggest:
- Read the Bible, always a good idea
- Read/listen to anything by Archbishop Fulton Sheen. A great communicator with a huge amount of solid teaching easily available for free
- Learn the faith, read the Catechism of the Catholic Church (though maybe not all at once…)
- Pick a saint to learn about each month. You don’t have to commit a lot of time to it, but each month pick a new saint and spend some time learning about them. Could be as simple as reading their wikipedia page and a few news articles on their life, thinking about them in the car etc. Just keep it simple. Each saint is different, as we are all different. Our task in life is not to repeat or mimic the life of another saint, but to become the unique saint we were created to become. The examples of others however may provide some inspiration on how we can do that
Of course not, but you **are **begging the question here. Nothing the Holy Father suggested, nor any of the bishops so far, has absolutely violated dogma or doctrine. There may be some that think they have, but such an opinion has not been established. Indeed, the very points under discussion here and among the Church are caused by some saying doctrine includes more than others are saying it includes. Since one of the “others” is Pope Francis, I think it is highly inappropriate to use words such as heresy and schism based on one’s own opinion of how far doctrine goes, when one is not in agreement with the Pope. It is a shutdown of the conversation, a type of bullying, that is, “I am right an you are going to Hell,” type of rhetoric. At the very least, it is useless. It contributes nothing but posturing to the conversation.
With respect, you might think it ‘highly inappropriate’ but if it is in fact the case as perceived by said Cardinals/bishops, they must proclaim it. In fact, Pope Francis has not said or done anything to violate dogma or doctrine, but it can indeed be argued that the bishops of Malta in their declaration may have done so. If in fact they (again, not Pope Francis, so it cannot be said that those who object are 'not in agreement with the Pope:) have gone beyond doctrine in their (the Maltese bishops) proclamations, their brother cardinals and bishops must speak out with clear words whether or not it seems ‘appropriate’ to the Catholic laity.
Useless, don’t forget useless. Emotional rhetoric is not needed for clarity. In fact, it distracts from clarity.
“If the divorced are remarried civilly, they find themselves in a situation that objectively contravenes God’s law. Consequently, they cannot receive Eucharistic communion as long as this situation persists” (CCC 1650).
I have to agree. We are literally seeing bishops contradicting each other. Archbishop Sample of the Archdiocese of Portland explicitly says the following in his archdiocese’s guidelines:
Archbishop Chaput’s guidelines for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia said this:
The Bishops of Malta said this:
As for issues of conscience, Bishop Elbs also said in that same interview:
Both selections of Bishop Elbs above contradict what was said by St. John Paul, quoted in Archbishop Sample’s guidelines. Fr. Gerald Murray of EWTN and the Catholic Thing, in response to Bishop Elbs said last week, "“This is abhorrent! People who are committing acts of adultery need guidance to stop, not be told that they can receive Communion.”