Is "Amoris Laetitia" as dangerous to Church teaching as some claim?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jas84173
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rau said:
Eg. The diubia were publicly released and not by the laity.
Click to expand...
Where they publicly released on the personal website of some Cardinal? Nope. Someone in the laity had to chose to publish it. Perhaps it started in the secular press. I don’t recall as I don’t really pay attention to the dubia fad.

And in any case, why do Catholics chose to meddle in affairs that are not their own, particularly Catholics that do not have the knowledge or competence to actually understand the dubia or Amoris Laetitia?

Also the “not-so-filial” petitions were not started by clergy, but by anonymous group or websites with a strong bias against the Church as it is today.

If a newspaper leaks an internal document of a corporation’s VP asking the CEO for clarification, the employees really have nothing to do with the matter. It is, as they say, above their pay grade. And they certainly wouldn’t go badmouthing the CEO and his policies, or the VP, if they care for the good name of their corporation.

Many Catholics instead seem to be very excited when something or someone is, as it were, thrown into the arena and the lions (Catholic and not) start tearing into them. There are literally dozens of online outlets dedicating to promote the one and only viewpoint that “Amoris Laetitia is dangerous” or heretical (or some similar absurdity) and extending the claims to name-calling the bishops that discussed certain topics at the synod and finally, to “hitting the shepherd” (forgetting that as a result, division and scandal occurs). And the issues addressed are issues that are best left to real theologians and to the order of bishops and their priests to discuss.

I have yet to find more than five websites that actually spend time discussing the major issues brought forth and addressed, some for the first time by AL, and explaining how it is in continuity with Catholic tradition and where are the new developments.

Just look at this forum. There’s a thread about whether an Apostolic Exhortation written by the Holy Father as a result of two international Synods is “dangerous to Churh teaching”, instead of discussing what is groundbreaking about it and which parts are relevant and practical for the laity.

The devil is running circles around many Catholics and they not even notice. In fact, their pride makes them feel like they are the smart ones. They are the ones who “know”. They have the gnosis…get it? 😑 But the truth is not found in sects or sectarian mindsets of aggressive divisionism. It is found in the living Magisterium of the Church, in her bosom, on the foundation of the faith of Peter, to whom we are bound here and now to honor, respect, and obey.
 
Last edited:
jas84173 said:
King David. Well he did the unspeakable but God still loved him.

Someone show me where it says being responsible and not getting a girl pregnant and then having to have the conversation of abortion is anyway a sin. It is responsible.
Click to expand...
King David was severely punished by God. He cursed King David’s family for generations and he took his and Bathsheba’s infant…and David didn’t whine and complain about it. He took his punishment as he ought.

First, by girl, I hope you mean your wife. If you’re having relations outside of marriage you’re in serious sin. The CC’s teaching is clear…the marital embrace must always be open to life as God intended it. Plus many forms of contraception cause early abortion.
 
Bishop against bishop, cardinal against cardinal. Akita. Nothing to see here…it’s simply prophesy being fulfilled.
 
Same here, in Canada

Many of our Priests became somewhat lazy (or did they lose hope? who knows)
They are practically silent about confession, about deadly sins, about what Catholic should
stand for, and against, in their daily lives according to our values and the Catholic Catechism.

More and more, permissive “ideologies” infiltrates our universities;
Free-thinkers and modernists are being invited left and right in different dioceses, spreading their heresies to
new generations of priests and faithfuls. Amoris Laetitia’s ambiguity will only give some twisted validation
to these people, if the pope doesn’t specify the meaning behind some of his words.

Until he does, the danger is real.
The only “positive” side (if I can call it that) is that this ambiguity will leave a visible gap between “false” Catholics who embraced heresies, and those who stayed true to the Catholic Church, and to God’s teaching.
A gap between the false Church, and the real one.
 
Last edited:
The document? Rau…AL is the document and it is simple read and clear.
Unless you are still reading one footnote…for a change…
Don t you think so?
In any case,I haven t lost hope we can get to chapter IV .
Let me know if we eeever get there!😃
 
Last edited:
graciew said:
The document? Rau…AL is the document and it is simple read and clear.
Click to expand...
The bulk is clear. Ch VIII not so much. You might have heard it has produced a bit of confusion here and there. Cardinals asking for formal clarification, different Bishops Conferences concluding it means different things, etc. It has been discussed quite widely.
 
That was the post,Rau.The document itself,Amoris Laetitiae, is simple and clear to read.
The bulk is clear,as you say , as to encourage its reading
 
Last edited:
  1. " In some countries, especially in various parts of Africa, **secularism has **
    not weakened certain traditional values, and marriages forge a strong bond between two wider families, with clearly defined structures for dealing with problems and conflicts. Nowadays we are grateful too for the witness of marriages that have not only proved lasting, but also fruitful and loving. All these factors can inspire a positive and welcoming pastoral approach capable of helping couples to grow in appreciation of the demands of the Gospel…
And who was instrumental, and who can the Church thank for establishing this model of a flourishing and Traditional Church in that part of the world; none other than the then Vicar Apostolic of Dakar, Senegal, and later, the Apostolic Delegate for West Africa, Archbishop Marcel LeFebvre.
 
Last edited:
This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard. If I am sinning I do not even care. How dare anyone say that using a simple precaution in an act that guess what people Do, maybe 0.1% of the population live chaste lives. This is a problem and why so many people are pushed away from the Church. And guess what it’s always been a problem but people used to just go to church anyways. It’s nothing new. You people seriously think telling people not to have sex is going to work realistically? Give me a break. This is the real world.
 
Last edited:
jas84173 said:
How dare anyone say that using a simple precaution [is wrong?]
Click to expand...
When robbing a bank, it may be a wise precaution to kill witnesses. I have not come across this “wise precaution” defence in court, or anywhere else.
 
The Church is teaching to deaf ears in that case. Seriously how many people just don’t have sex
 
The Church doesn’t know what it teaches when you have a Pope saying people living in adultery can have the Eucharist .
As far as I’m concerned until it knows what it teaches I can do whatever I want.
 
Joe1 said:
He replied that he (Cardinal Burke) was misinterpreting the encyclical (something along the lines of that). The response confused me because Cardinal Burke is well educated and probably couldn’t misinterpret such a document of importance unless it was really confusing. But that’s just my opinion
Click to expand...
That’s my opinion also. If Cardinal Burke is misinterpreting it, then it should be easy for our Holy Father to heal all of this by correctly interpreting it in responding to the dubia. It would not only help those like Cardinal Burke, but would also clarify for those using it as a license for blatant heresy and sacrilege.

I’ll just keep praying for them and the Church.

God Bless You

Thank you for reading.
 
Last edited:
Through all of this debate over AL, i have clung to Gerhard Müller’s responses most heavily. And because i like the way he speaks.

Here, he has taken the turn from what he was concerned with. So i understand why you are shaken some.

But i have expressed that until Francis directly and formally addresses it, i will be most open to Müller’s responses. Though my only reservation is because i truly do believe Pope Francis should be addressing it directly and formerly. It doesnt matter if he has “the right” to be silent. And its not wrong to acknowledge that the laity is rightly concerned about the moral grounds to the Exhortation. We should be concerned to find the moral grounds about it.
 
CatholicGearSolid said:
The only “positive” side (if I can call it that) is that this ambiguity will leave a visible gap between “false” Catholics who embraced heresies, and those who stayed true to the Catholic Church, and to God’s teaching.

A gap between the false Church, and the real one.
Click to expand...
How can the gap between those who are true to the Church and those who are false be visible, save to God alone who alone knows the hearts of men? No one can know. And as always, those that attempt this will hold as their standard their own opinion, in this case, of Amoris Laetitia. I do not deny that opinions are valid, and often well-formed, but they must not be the standard whereby we judge our brothers and sisters as “false.”

Thousands of denominations exist because people who choose to elevate their interpretation of Scripture to a point they judge others. We must fracture the Church by doing the same thing with our interpretation of Scripture.
 
Last edited:
josh987654321 said:
It would not only help those like Cardinal Burke, but would also clarify for those using it as a license for blatant heresy and sacrilege.
Click to expand...
I do not see how this would help these people. The problem is people will always find a way to justify sin if they try hard enough. On the other side, those that believe to know better than the Pope (the might, but they also may not), still will set their own opinion as a standard.

I do not see these two problems changing. More to the point, they are the only real problems we here can actually fix.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top