Concerning Amoris Laetitia

[pnewton]

With a statement like that, understand if I do not trust your logic. Many people post here all the time, with disagreement and discussion, without blind obedience (whatever that term means). Right or wrong, being charitable is more important than being right on some theological point.

 

[pnewton]

Doubtful laws do not bind, and Amoris Laetitia is certainly not a binding document in any case.

That is because there is nothing in it to “bind,” whatever you mean by that. Most people that gripe about it haven’t read it.

 

[Kathleen18]

Oh just don’t even start such nonsense! I follow Jesus Christ by Faith, not CAF!!!

 

[calinorth86]

How can I verify that AL is not binding? In other words what does the church teach about what is binding and what is not binding concerning AL? And please don’t reply with opinions I just want to know what the church teaches.

 

[pnewton]

How can I verify that AL is not binding?

My I ask what part of it you find difficult to do?

 

[Crocus]

Also does it really teach that the divorced and remarried can participate in holy communion?

After you have read the document, can you please point out which sentences or paragraphs may be troubling to you. That could be a good place to begin discussion.

 

[Crocus]

There is no room for discussion in these forums.

After you have read the document, can you please point out which sentences or paragraphs may be troubling to you. That could be a good place to begin discussion.

 

[graciew]

And this being the conclusion after only 48 hs of having joined the forums?

 

[BlackFriar]

There is no room for discussion in these forums. Only blind obedience, even if that obedience comes to supporting error, as is the case with Amoris Laetitia.

Post flagged for Moderation due to breaching of Forum rules.
CAF members may not criticise the Clergy.

 

[KMG]

What a slippery slope.

The forum rules say do not incite animosity towards anyone, especially clergy. The rules do not say you can’t criticize clergy.

The idea you can’t criticize clergy is completely un-Catholic.

 

[BlackFriar]

From previous (censored) posting the member seems to have issues.

 

[pnewton]

CAF members may not criticise the Clergy.

We are not clergy. Again, though, I ask of critics, what part is seen as binding and something that you cannot support?

 

[angel12]

AL makes an allowance for adulterers to receive Communion.

Providing the exact reference from AL would allow proper discussion.

 

[Ann_Stanton]

Most people on this forum are very charitable. Not everyone agrees with all posters. Perhaps your decision to leave the Latin Church misleads people about your opinions. Might I suggest you link to credible sources your belief that a particular individual has said or done something you believe is wrong. A sweeping statement does not help others to understand your point of view. I am sure that you already know this because of your past posts.

 

[deMontfort]

You were told before: Accusing clergy of apostasy was against forum rules.

 

[pnewton]

AL makes an allowance for adulterers to receive Communion. That is not permissible in Christ’s Catholic teachings.

That last part begs the question that has never been defined. It has been thoroughly debated here pro and con. Even the bishops of the Church are split on whether this is doctrine, or just a discipline of centuries based in doctrine. We can do that again, but it will not be solved here until it is defined one way or another by a pope or council.

Even so, this one sentence in this long letter gives no instruction, and binds no one to anything. Quite the opposite, the wording clearly allows for leeway.

It is an understandable criticism that now was the time for this issue to be defined formally and instituted as dogma, unless one understands Church history and knows how careful the Church is to move on such matters. Also, the definition may not have been what you and others want. For now, there is some room for legitimate disagreement, which means there is unlimited room for conscience and a call to charity for those who disagree.

 

[KMG]

There is zero room in Catholicism for adulterers to receive Communion.

 

[MCH1]

There is zero room in Catholicism for adulterers to receive Communion.

Completely true. Regardless of what AL says, this is unchangeable Church teaching.

 

[MCH1]

written document, is part of the ordinary magisterium and is binding on the faithful.

It contains passages that some hold to be heretical. Certainly it must be clarified and found to be not in error before it is binding?

 

[pnewton]

It contains passages that some hold to be heretical.

Some may hold pretty much anything heretical. That does not make heresy. It matter not. No one has posted from the encyclical here yet anyway. Heck, I’ll start:

The couple that loves and begets life is a
true, living icon – not an idol like those of stone
or gold prohibited by the Decalogue – capable
of revealing God the Creator and Saviour