Full Text of Pope Francis' New Document on the Family (MERGED)

  • Thread starter Thread starter dmar198
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
godisgood77 #38
The only issue with this argument is that Pope Francis clearly does not state that the document is not an act of the magisterium.
Click to expand...
Cardinal Burke always carefully teaches with great clarity – it’s time to listen, and learn.

‘Amoris Laetitia’ and the Constant Teaching and Practice of the Church
REGISTER EXCLUSIVE: Cardinal Burke says a post-synodal apostolic exhortation, ‘by its very nature, does not propose new doctrine and discipline, but applies the perennial doctrine and discipline to the situation of the world at the time.’
by CARDINAL RAYMOND BURKE 04/12/2016
ncregister.com/daily-news/amoris-laetitia-and-the-constant-teaching-and-practice-of-the-church/

**Pope Francis makes clear, from the beginning, that the post-synodal apostolic exhortation is not an act of the magisterium (3). The very form of the document confirms the same. It is written as a reflection of the Holy Father on the work of the last two sessions of the Synod of Bishops. **For instance, in Chapter Eight, which some wish to interpret as the proposal of a new discipline with obvious implications for the Church’s doctrine, Pope Francis, citing his post-synodal apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, declares:

I understand those who prefer a more rigorous pastoral care which leaves no room for confusion. But I sincerely believe that Jesus wants a Church attentive to the goodness which the Holy Spirit sows in the midst of human weakness, a Mother who, while clearly expressing her objective teaching, “always does what good she can, even if in the process her shoes get soiled by the mud of the street” (308).

In other words, the Holy Father is proposing what he personally believes is the will of Christ for his Church, but he does not intend to impose his point of view, nor to condemn those who insist on what he calls “a more rigorous pastoral care.” The personal, that is, non-magisterial, nature of the document is also evident in the fact that the references cited are principally the final report of the 2015 session of the Synod of Bishops and the addresses and homilies of Pope Francis himself. **There is no consistent effort to relate the text, in general, or these citations to the magisterium, the Fathers of the Church and other proven authors. **[My emphases].
 
Abu said:
Cardinal Burke always carefully teaches with great clarity – it’s time to listen, and learn.

‘Amoris Laetitia’ and the Constant Teaching and Practice of the Church
REGISTER EXCLUSIVE: Cardinal Burke says a post-synodal apostolic exhortation, ‘by its very nature, does not propose new doctrine and discipline, but applies the perennial doctrine and discipline to the situation of the world at the time.’
by CARDINAL RAYMOND BURKE 04/12/2016
ncregister.com/daily-news/amoris-laetitia-and-the-constant-teaching-and-practice-of-the-church/

**Pope Francis makes clear, from the beginning, that the post-synodal apostolic exhortation is not an act of the magisterium (3). The very form of the document confirms the same. It is written as a reflection of the Holy Father on the work of the last two sessions of the Synod of Bishops. **For instance, in Chapter Eight, which some wish to interpret as the proposal of a new discipline with obvious implications for the Church’s doctrine, Pope Francis, citing his post-synodal apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, declares:

I understand those who prefer a more rigorous pastoral care which leaves no room for confusion. But I sincerely believe that Jesus wants a Church attentive to the goodness which the Holy Spirit sows in the midst of human weakness, a Mother who, while clearly expressing her objective teaching, “always does what good she can, even if in the process her shoes get soiled by the mud of the street” (308).

In other words, the Holy Father is proposing what he personally believes is the will of Christ for his Church, but he does not intend to impose his point of view, nor to condemn those who insist on what he calls “a more rigorous pastoral care.” The personal, that is, non-magisterial, nature of the document is also evident in the fact that the references cited are principally the final report of the 2015 session of the Synod of Bishops and the addresses and homilies of Pope Francis himself. **There is no consistent effort to relate the text, in general, or these citations to the magisterium, the Fathers of the Church and other proven authors. [My emphases].
**
Click to expand...
Yes, I read what +Burke put in the newspaper. I just does not say what he says it does. He is being criticized from all sides for this leap in interpretation… He took significant liberty and it’s not based on fact… I’m sad to see it
 
godisgood77 said:
Really sad to read +Burke’s comments.

It appears that he falsely and mistakenly claims that Pope Francis establishes in paragraph 3 of the Exhortation that it is not meant to be magisterial in nature.

In fact, the Pope said this in that paragraph -
3. Since “time is greater than space”, I would make it clear that not all discussions of doctrinal, moral or pastoral issues need to be settled by interventions of the magisterium. Unity of teaching and practice is certainly necessary in the Church, but this does not preclude various ways of interpreting some aspects of that teaching or drawing certain consequences from it. This will always be the case as the Spirit guides us towards the entire truth (cf. Jn 16:13), until he leads us fully into the mystery of Christ and enables us to see all things as he does. Each country or region, moreover, can seek solutions better suited to its culture and sensitive to its traditions and local needs. For “cultures are in fact quite diverse and every general principle… needs to be inculturated, if it is to be respected and applied”.3

It is quite clear that the Pope is not making a statement about the weight of the document, but is instead teaching that situations, teachings and circumstances can be interpreted in multiple ways … And Thank-God for our beautiful diversity!!

It is very sad for me to read such and open and frontal attack on the Pope.

In the article, Cardinal Burke goes on to say…
“The personal, that is, non-magisterial, nature of the document is also evident in the fact that the references cited are principally the final report of the 2015 session of the Synod of Bishops, and the addresses and homilies of Pope Francis himself. There is no consistent effort to relate the text, in general, or these citations to the magisterium, the Fathers of the Church and other proven authors.”

It is very sad for me to read this because, in fact the document seems to draw a great deal from the Bible (cited more than any other place), Popes ranging from Leo XIII, Pius XII, Paul VI, Saint JPII and more, VII, Bishops conferences and to be sure, his own many years of priestly duty. It is unfortunate to see +Burke cite his own experience as credible and undermine the Pope’s so blatantly.

It should bring great pain to all to see such division at a time when we should be celebrating a great teacher and Pastor. We are truly blessed by God to have Pope Francis
Click to expand...
You’ve lost me. What disrespect do you see in what Burke wrote? What cause for sadness? What do you understand “magisterial” to mean? What identifiable change to doctrine or discipline (if any) do you believe AL communicates?
 
April 13, 2016
The Curate’s Egg: A Reflection on Amoris Laetitia
Fr. George W. Rutler
For those who don’t know of Fr Rutler, he is another giant in the Catholic Faith.
crisismagazine.com/2016/the-curates-egg-a-reflection-on-amoris-laetitia
Extracts:
Not only is verbosity indicative of muddled thinking, it is the rhetorical indulgence of the modern age. The documents of the Second Vatican Council are wordier than the extant records of all the other ecumenical councils combined. The recent apostolic exhortation, Amoris Laetitia, is nearly two-thirds the length of all the Vatican II promulgations. The literary quality of Amoris Laetitia does not challenge the claim that the Authorized Version, or King James’s Bible, is the only successful work of art composed by a committee.

Much, perhaps too much, has already been said about this apostolic exhortation, often revealing as much about the commentators as their commentaries. It is true that there are parts of it that are eloquent, but most of them are quotations of God and Saint Paul. The Word does have a way with words, and the charity of the Apostle gave him the tongue of an angel. In contrast, there are a lot of gongs clanging and cymbals clashing in the contradictions and redundancies of much of the exhortation’s diction. Parts like the affirmation of Humanae Vitae settle the text in the sacred tradition, but there is also the muddled treatment of moral culpability that almost nods to the neuralgic interpretation of the “fundamental option” theory rejected by St. John Paul II (Veritatis Splendor, nn.65, 67). This had been addressed earlier by a formal declaration of the Holy See: A person’s moral disposition “can be completely changed by particular acts, especially when, as often happens, these have been prepared for by previous more superficial acts. Whatever the case, it is wrong to say that particular acts are not enough to constitute a mortal sin” (Persona Humana, December 29, 1975, No. 10).

One was perplexed when a European cardinal said, at the press conference presenting the apostolic exhortation, that it was an example of John Henry Newman’s Development of Doctrine. At the heart of Newman’s developmental economy is the “preservation of type” and it is hard to see that preservation in some of the ambiguities of Chapter 8. Newman’s exposition of Development was a justification of tradition and not a training manual for altering that tradition. Newman’s Development is not Hegel’s “dialectic.”

Parenthetically, in the ambiguities of the exhortation on conscience, we may be paying a price for the problematic way that a prudential opinion against capital punishment was edited into the Catechism. You can disagree about the application of natural law reasoning to civil punishment, but any loose sentiment in treating the matter tempts fragile thinkers to consider the death penalty as an intrinsic evil, and that only makes it easier for the same sort of imprudence (pace Pope Gregory) to modify the natural law of contraception and marriage itself. The decline of moral realism is like a shift from realism in art to impressionism and then invariably to expressionism. That expressionism, for instance, seemed to be the tone of a book by the Argentine theologian and consultant on the writing of Amoris Laetitia, Victor Manuel Fernandez: Heal Me with Your Mouth: The Art of Kissing. I imagine Henry VIII writing the foreword to that, without the approbation of Saint Thomas More.
 
Rau said:
You’ve lost me. What disrespect do you see in what Burke wrote? What cause for sadness? What do you understand “magisterial” to mean? What identifiable change to doctrine or discipline (if any) do you believe AL communicates?
Click to expand...
I believe +Burke is taking an excessive liberty in interpreting the Pope’s intent with AL. In think this is evident in how his comments directly conflict with how the cardinal the Pope chose to communicate the teaching says. He is basically telling us to feel free to disregard the Pope’s teaching

Also, the document references all sorts of sources…the bible, the thr teachings of several Pope’s and church documents, Aquinas, etc. +Burke tries to discount the depth of the doc by claiming says that the doc draws from Pope’s homilies, not proven writers.

It’s sad to me to see +Burke jockey for position in the media and attempt to undercut the Holy Father.

Magisterial means authoritative.
 
Abu said:
April 13, 2016
The Curate’s Egg: A Reflection on Amoris Laetitia
Fr. George W. Rutler
For those who don’t know of Fr Rutler, he is another giant in the Catholic Faith.
crisismagazine.com/2016/the-curates-egg-a-reflection-on-amoris-laetitia
Extracts:
Not only is verbosity indicative of muddled thinking, it is the rhetorical indulgence of the modern age. The documents of the Second Vatican Council are wordier than the extant records of all the other ecumenical councils combined. The recent apostolic exhortation, Amoris Laetitia, is nearly two-thirds the length of all the Vatican II promulgations. The literary quality of Amoris Laetitia does not challenge the claim that the Authorized Version, or King James’s Bible, is the only successful work of art composed by a committee.

…
Click to expand...
I’m not going to “Cherry pick”
the article is linked here

**Vatican-approved magazine: Exhortation opens door to Holy Communion for remarried divorcees **

lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-approved-newspaper-exhortation-allows-holy-communion-for-remarried
 
alwayswill #45
I’m not going to “Cherry pick” [from Vatican-approved magazine: Exhortation opens door to Holy Communion for remarried divorcees | News | LifeSite]
Click to expand...
lifesitenews.com/news/va…-for-remarried
That’s why the comments state very clearly in keeping with the studious and learned appraisals that:
“Although some passages of Amoris Laetitia upheld Church teaching on moral issues like abortion, euthanasia, gender theory, and same-sex “marriage,” numerous Catholic writers, theologians, and canon lawyers have expressed concerns about the exhortation. The lay group Voice of the Family expressed concern over certain passages that they say seriously undermine the teachings and practice of the Church."
**
But the usual group of progressives promote their views:**
“Liberal German theologians are also praising the exhortation in interviews and articles on the official website of the German Bishops. Dr. Maike Hickson has reported on these theologians at Catholicism.org.”

'Stephan Goertz, a progressive German theologian who has argued that same-sex relationships could potentially have a “sacramental character,” praised *Amoris Laetitia’s *omission of “explicit condemnation of homosexual practice as a grave sin.”

’ “The category of ‘natural’ and ‘unnatural’ which dominated the Church’s sexual morality for centuries,” is thankfully on the backburner now, Goertz said.’

Clearly lacking in the confused is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth!
 
Abu said:
Cardinal Burke always carefully teaches with great clarity – it’s time to listen, and learn.
Click to expand...
I was going to say the same thing about Pope Francis! He is my Pope after all. I am excited to see what my Bishop has to say about this new document, since Cardinal Burke says what he “personally believes is the will of Christ for his Church, but he does not intend to impose his point of view.”

Okay, I get the limitations of the document, but I will choose to take what Pope Francis, as he is affirming what I have always seen as a something missing in the Church approach to people in irregular marriages.

**
Fr. George W. Rutler
Click to expand...
For those who don’t know of Fr Rutler, he is another giant in the Catholic Faith]
**Who is a “giant in the Catholic faith” is an opinion. Who is the pope, is not. He is not my priest, so there is no need for me to concern myself with his criticisms of his superior.

For someone who claims verbosity is indicative of muddled thinking, he sure goes on.
 
Exactly.

As one educated by great British Jesuits in the 1940’s, it is very disturbing to see the machinations of this Jesuit Pope which unfortunately he apparently acquired in Argentina.

The faithful comments by so many great Catholic clergy, including those on the EWTN World Over TV program have clarified the reality that Cardinal Raymond Burke so faithfully described.
 
InternetWoman said:
Here is a very thought provoking article by the Editor of “First Things” Magazine.

firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2016/04/a-stubborn-givenness
Click to expand...
I think that author captures quite well the approach and style adopted by Francis in AL (and on other issues). This article is not the first place I’ve encountered the charge that Francis chooses to be intentionally ambiguous, simultaneously seeking to uphold established Church teaching, while implying that other possible avenues are open if they can serve the good.
 
pnewton said:
I was going to say the same thing about Pope Francis! He is my Pope after all.
Click to expand...
Francis is a man of great compassion and tenderness. However my I would hotly dispute that all of AL is presented with great clarity.
 
InternetWoman said:
If you have an hour here is a panel discussion by members of the staff of Ignatius Press:

youtube.com/watch?v=rlp2tKXHwuc
Click to expand...
I did watch this. One particular point that struck me was made by the (Jesuit) priest on the panel - in the form of a criticism, both of a contemporary Church tendency (he says), and also of this Papal document. More specifically, he refers to:
  • the watering down of moral principles. Eg. in AL27 Francis quotes from the bible the case of the women adulterer, and describes Jesus as telling her to “lead a more worthy life”, when the Bible is rather more direct in saying “go and sin no more”.
  • the repeated references to describing wrong behaviour as not attaining “the full ideal”. He points out it is somewhat euphemistic to regard an adulterous relationship as “falling short of the ideal” of marriage. The priest comments that John the Baptist (I think) did not say to Herod “You’re not living up fully to the ideal of marriage”, but rather “Herod, the law says you shall not take your brother’s wife as your own”. These messages are both entirely true, and truly different - it is only the latter that gets one’s head cut off.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top