Cardinal Wuerl: The Catholic Church is moving from legalism to mercy

[JimG]

No, but mercy can give the penitent hope and strength to get right with God, and eventually correct their irregular situation which for most cannot be done instantaneously (it took me years, for example, to convince my wife to have our marriage convalidated).

Strict legalism on such matters destroys hope. Destroying hope also destroys souls. Destroying hope and driving someone away from God’s mercy gives one lots to answer for on judgement day. What that is, is simply trying to put human limits on God’s mercy. God won’t be fooled that easily!

Okay, that’s a good answer to my two questions. Mercy can’t fix an invalid marriage, but it can give hope. The impression I get from many writing about the synod is that they expect that the teaching on the indissolubility of marriage will somehow be changed by fiat.

 

[Ender]

No, but mercy can give the penitent hope and strength to get right with God, and eventually correct their irregular situation which for most cannot be done instantaneously (it took me years, for example, to convince my wife to have our marriage convalidated).

Strict legalism on such matters destroys hope. Destroying hope also destroys souls. Destroying hope and driving someone away from God’s mercy gives one lots to answer for on judgement day. What that is, is simply trying to put human limits on God’s mercy. God won’t be fooled that easily!

I think it is more accurate to say that this is an example of trying to be more merciful than God.1847 "God created us without us: but he did not will to save us without us. To receive his mercy, we must admit our faults*.**
*It is the unwillingness to admit our faults, that is, to repent of them, that is the obstacle, not strict legalism (which in this context means nothing more than acting in accordance with the doctrines of the church.)

Ender

 

[pnewton]

If the repentance was real the sins could be absolved, and they could receive communion.

That’s a switch. I was talking about the prodigal son. He did not have “absolution”.

 

[Midwest88]

Mercy in a form of muddle, vague standards. There should be a retirement age for the clergy. You get old enough and you become only useful to modernism.

 

[Ender]

That’s a switch. I was talking about the prodigal son. He did not have “absolution”.

The point is that he repented of his sin, which his father clearly forgave. I’m guessing there was no comparable sense of confession/absolution among the ancient Israelites.

Ender

 

[Michael1978]

I disagree. An intrinsic aspect of being catholic is constantly reorienting youself to the guidance of the pope whoever he may be. If you don’t free your soul to that purpose you are just ‘playing’ catholic. One of the rules here is not to badmouth clergy or Pope Francis. Even very few lay theologians will do such a thing and yet these self righteous American journalists and commentators feel above the church itself in their cowardly attacks on the church. *** I’d love to see them silenced.***

Yikes.

 

[styrgwillidar]

No, but mercy can give the penitent hope and strength to get right with God, and eventually correct their irregular situation which for most cannot be done instantaneously (it took me years, for example, to convince my wife to have our marriage convalidated).

Strict legalism on such matters destroys hope. Destroying hope also destroys souls. Destroying hope and driving someone away from God’s mercy gives one lots to answer for on judgement day. What that is, is simply trying to put human limits on God’s mercy. God won’t be fooled that easily!

Christ used the analogy of a doctor-- who goes to the sick who need Him, not the healthy.

We’re all sinners, we all need Christ and the Church— I think it’s about making folks feel welcome even if the path they’ve chosen has been riddled with mistakes. How will they rectify them if there’s no guidance?

A doctor can not treat patients afraid of the hospital, or who believe the hospital doesn’t want them there. I think that’s what Pope Francis’ point is in this. Not changing doctrine, but trying to make all feel truly welcome and work change in their lives that is not possible otherwise.

 

[Mark121359]

Yikes.

Yes indeed. Sounds a lot like what progressives want to see happen to the church here in the U.S.

Peace, Mark

 

[Mystrx]

Christ used the analogy of a doctor-- who goes to the sick who need Him, not the healthy.

We’re all sinners, we all need Christ and the Church— I think it’s about making folks feel welcome even if the path they’ve chosen has been riddled with mistakes. How will they rectify them if there’s no guidance?

A doctor can not treat patients afraid of the hospital, or who believe the hospital doesn’t want them there. I think that’s what Pope Francis’ point is in this. Not changing doctrine, but trying to make all feel truly welcome and work change in their lives that is not possible otherwise.

Excellent Point

 

[Lormar]

Yes indeed. Sounds a lot like what progressives want to see happen to the church here in the U.S.

Peace, Mark

That type of thinking is more widespread than you think. It’s very dangerous.

I’m not referring to your post, Mark, but the one you are commenting on. Just need to clarify that.

 

[Lormar]

No, but mercy can give the penitent hope and strength to get right with God, and eventually correct their irregular situation which for most cannot be done instantaneously (it took me years, for example, to convince my wife to have our marriage convalidated).

Strict legalism on such matters destroys hope. Destroying hope also destroys souls. Destroying hope and driving someone away from God’s mercy gives one lots to answer for on judgement day. What that is, is simply trying to put human limits on God’s mercy. God won’t be fooled that easily!

Very well put, Ora.

 

[OraLabora]

Christ used the analogy of a doctor-- who goes to the sick who need Him, not the healthy.

We’re all sinners, we all need Christ and the Church— I think it’s about making folks feel welcome even if the path they’ve chosen has been riddled with mistakes. How will they rectify them if there’s no guidance?

A doctor can not treat patients afraid of the hospital, or who believe the hospital doesn’t want them there. I think that’s what Pope Francis’ point is in this. Not changing doctrine, but trying to make all feel truly welcome and work change in their lives that is not possible otherwise.

Spot on! Our case wasn’t even complicated, but still took years. I was a revert many years ago after a long absence. Entered into a civil marriage at that time. First-time marriages for both of us so no complications. I was a lapsed Catholic but my wife wasn’t baptized. Eventually she was baptized into the Anglican church. But it still took years to convince my wife that Catholicism wasn’t a three-headed monster and that having our marriage convalidated was important to me. Though she’s still Anglican she’s now a huge Pope Francis fan and also Benedictine spirituality fan.

I can imagine that some folks have made even bigger messes of their lives. The Church has a responsibility for their souls, and needs to find a merciful and meaningful way to minister to them. I can’t imagine how they could manage without sacramental grace…

 

[Megan7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by “LongingSoul” View Post:

“Edward Pentin is a hatemonger. He claims the pope doesn’t care about canon law. What does Edward Pentns post make you feel about Pope Francis? Think about how Edward Pentin affects your faith.
I know that nothing on Gods earth will convince some people of how really corrosive EdwardPentins rubbish is but to those who long to see pope francis fulfill his calling as bringing Gods truth to our daily practice instead of trying to shut God up… please read Edward Pentin for what it really is. The work of a secular ideologue playing politics with your precious faith.”
" I’d love to see them silenced".​

Really? A hate monger? I’ve seen him interviewed by Raymond Arroyo on EWTN with Robert Royal and Fr. Gerald Murray and I saw no such hate. I’d call it concern. They (Fr. Murray and Mr. Royal) raised some serious questions as well. Are Mr. Royal and Fr. Murray hate mongers too? You need to open your post with* “In my opinion” *instead of saying with a blanket statement; “so and so is a hate monger.” You recently put down Mr. Arroyo in one of your posts as well if my memory serves me. You know, you can disagree with cardinals and even the pope and still be a good and faithful Catholic.

Peace, Mark

Dear Mark,

I am with you on this. I agree with everything you said.

I have seen the same type of posts (from the above poster) regarding Mr. Edward Pentin & Mr. Raymond Arroyo (EWTN) .

We may disagree with certain Journalists, but we should not call them names, belittle them or ask for them to be SILENCED. Which is what she posted in another post.

That is uncharitable & uncalled for. This is a CATHOLIC forum! Thank you for standing up for people who cannot defend themselves here!

God bless you!

+Pax

 

[FollowChrist34]

ROME — “The frame of reference is now going to be: ‘What does the Gospel really say here?’ That’s our first task.”

That’s Washington Cardinal Donald Wuerl summing up the new course for Catholicism set by the momentous Vatican meeting of 270 bishops from around the world that concluded last weekend, a three-week marathon in which he played a key role.

After often-contentious talks on whether to adapt the Church’s approach to issues such as divorce and cohabitation, the high-level synod succeeded in giving Pope Francis a document that offers him significant new flexibility in shaping more pastoral policies.

cruxnow.com/church/2015/10/28/cardinal-wuerl-the-catholic-church-is-moving-from-legalism-to-mercy/

One canon lawyer’s response…

**Canon law has never been ‘the frame of reference’ for the Church
Cardinal Wuerl’s recent comment about canon law confirms the stranglehold that antinomian attitudes have secured over ecclesiastical thought in the space of one lifetime
**
When prelates of the erudition and experience of a Donald Cdl. Wuerl (Washington DC) can say things like this, the rest of us can be in no doubt as to just how deeply and widely a fundamental misunderstanding of law in the Catholic Church has taken hold. Speaking about the future of the Church, Wuerl, who is recognized as one of Pope Francis’ most esteemed advisors, said that, in the wake of the 2015 Synod and the Francis’ papacy, “The frame of reference now is no longer the Code of Canon Law. The frame of reference is now going to be, ‘What does the Gospel really say here?’”

I hardly know where to start, but here goes.

The “frame of reference” for the mission of the Catholic Church has never, ever been the Code of Canon Law, and no canon lawyer I know of has ever, ever claimed otherwise. The “frame of reference” for the Catholic Church has always been, and has only been, Christ the Lord. For the cardinal archbishop of a major Western capital to talk as if the Code of Canon Law, for so much as one second, ever fancied itself as the “frame of reference” for the Catholic Church—well, it confirms the stranglehold that antinomian attitudes have secured over ecclesiastical thought in the space of one lifetime, to the point that today, many in the highest circles of ecclesiastical leadership can scarcely even talk about canon law without caricaturing it. But if Wuerl avoids offering some of the more insulting depictions of canon law and canon lawyers being tossed around recently, he nevertheless sees canon law largely as an obstacle to the saving truths proclaimed by Jesus and he gives urbane cover to others who find certain Gospel truths, as enunciated in concise legal terminology, too inconvenient.

I am not going to use a blog post to try to educate antinomians (whether they are “hard core” canon law haters, or, as I rather think Wuerl to be, gentler “Amator Si, Legislator No” types) as to the many and vital connections between Catholic doctrine and canon law, though I have raised such issues several times, say, here and here. Rather, I’ll just say this: canon law has always seen itself in service to the Church, huge tracts of canon law rest directly on biblical foundations and doctrinal assertions made by the Magisterium over the centuries, canon law is always in need of reform (just ask any canon lawyer), and finally, that some people railing against canon law need to ask themselves whether it is law they don’t like, or the truths such laws defend.

catholicworldreport.com/Blog/4326/canon_law_has_never_been_the_frame_of_reference_for_the_church.aspx

 

[Michael1978]

Quote:

Originally Posted by “LongingSoul” View Post:

"Edward Pentin is a hatemonger. He claims the pope doesn’t care about canon law. What does Edward Pentns post make you feel about Pope Francis? Think about how Edward Pentin affects your faith.

I know that nothing on Gods earth will convince some people of how really corrosive EdwardPentins rubbish is but to those who long to see pope francis fulfill his calling as bringing Gods truth to our daily practice instead of trying to shut God up… please read Edward Pentin for what it really is. The work of a secular ideologue playing politics with your precious faith."​

Dear Mark,

I am with you on this. I agree with everything you said.

I have seen the same type of posts (from the above poster) regarding Mr. Edward Pentin & Mr. Raymond Arroyo (EWTN) .

We may disagree with certain Journalists, but we should not call them names, belittle them or ask for them to be SILENCED. Which is what she posted in another post.

That is uncharitable & uncalled for. This is a CATHOLIC forum! Thank you for standing up for people who cannot defend themselves here!

God bless you!

+Pax

Yes. It’s amazing how some posters demonize and insult faithful, orthodox Catholics, and then wish to see them silenced, while they themselves prattle on about any number of topics unabated as if they are the holders of all knowledge of the Faith.

 

[ProVobis]

We’re all sinners, we all need Christ and the Church— I think it’s about making folks feel welcome even if the path they’ve chosen has been riddled with mistakes. How will they rectify them if there’s no guidance?

The ones who have remarried have at least found someone else to share their lives with. I think I would rather concentrate on those who don’t have such comfort.

IOW, who welcomes whom here?

 

[Megan7]

Yes. It’s amazing how some posters demonize and insult faithful, orthodox Catholics, and then wish to see them silenced, while they themselves prattle on about any number of topics unabated as if they are the holders of all knowledge of the Faith.

Dear Michael,

Thank you for your kind post:thumbsup: I agree with you entirely. It seems that tolerance, Mercy is only a 1 way street. And the the rest of us need to be ** silenced.**:crying:

What hurts more is how they show so much disdain, toward Princes of the Church, like Cardinal Burke. Sometimes it is subtle , sometimes it is a full blown attack. Just because someone stands by the TRUTH. Even the Holy Father asked for open dialogue & (name removed by moderator)ut.

Instead we all need to be** silenced**

God bless you!

+PAX

 

[FollowChrist34]

The ones who have remarried have at least found someone else to share their lives with. I think I would rather concentrate on those who don’t have such comfort.

IOW, who welcomes whom here?

I do personally find it odd that this one group of people and their cause (the divorced and remarried and their capacity/incapacity to take communion) has so cornered, consumed even, the mercy and focus of the Church. (not to overlook the odd crumb of course being offered to those in irregular unions or in active homosexual relationships) Frankly, it is a little surreal - tone deaf almost.

 

[Mark121359]

Quote:

Originally Posted by “LongingSoul” View Post:

"Edward Pentin is a hatemonger. He claims the pope doesn’t care about canon law. What does Edward Pentns post make you feel about Pope Francis? Think about how Edward Pentin affects your faith.

I know that nothing on Gods earth will convince some people of how really corrosive EdwardPentins rubbish is but to those who long to see pope francis fulfill his calling as bringing Gods truth to our daily practice instead of trying to shut God up… please read Edward Pentin for what it really is. The work of a secular ideologue playing politics with your precious faith."​

Dear Mark,

I am with you on this. I agree with everything you said.

I have seen the same type of posts (from the above poster) regarding Mr. Edward Pentin & Mr. Raymond Arroyo (EWTN) .

We may disagree with certain Journalists, but we should not call them names, belittle them or ask for them to be SILENCED. Which is what she posted in another post.

That is uncharitable & uncalled for. This is a CATHOLIC forum! Thank you for standing up for people who cannot defend themselves here!

God bless you!

+Pax

Well you’re most welcome Megan. And I agree with you as well. Asking someone who has an opinion different than their own to be silenced is frightening to say the least.

God bless you Megan!

Peace, Mark

 

[gracepoole]

I do personally find it odd that this one group of people and their cause (the divorced and remarried and their capacity/incapacity to take communion) has so cornered, consumed even, the mercy and focus of the Church. (not to overlook the odd crumb of course being offered to those in irregular unions or in active homosexual relationships) Frankly, it is a little surreal - tone deaf almost.

I don’t see it that way. The Church may be addressing the divorced and remarried right now but I don’t believe it’s at the expense of anyone who doesn’t fall into this category. For example, the Pope has made it possible for all priests to forgive the sin of abortion during the Year of Mercy. And of course, if the divorced and remarried represent a group that’s distanced from the Church (and therefore from Christ), it seems prudent to put as much time and energy as are needed into bringing them back into full communion.