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.
Saint John Paul, when he said they were not to receive communion called it a practice. Actually, I think he said something about being an unbroken practice. That does not mean it cannot also be doctrine, but I wonder, since He was such a precise theologian.

I am thinking about whether communion worthiness hinges on the relationship with the Church, or with God, or with both, as a matter doctrine, not just a practical matter. As people can find themselves in this situation with no fault of their own (sin), much less mortal sin, it is a sticky question.

I see this “danger” as an opportunity for theological understanding and exploration, which is what Jesus promised us the Holy Spirit would do. We do not know it all yet. So maybe it is a very dangerous document, as dangerous as the Gospel. Danger is not always to be avoided.
 
Last edited:
You see, that if we base its justification on saying “its just a practice” then, by that principle, what is preventing complete admission to the Eucharist for all situations of unrepented sins? And by unrepented, i mean “not turned from”.

And as i was saying before, what one pastor might believe is an unjustified situation to receive, another might feel justified.

How can it be a matter of fallible priests to discern? I think Pope Francis is trusting that our priests are wiser than they actually are.

Ive been told by priests, that i should use condoms (under my situation). I wrote the diocese to know if a priest was able to advise people that. They gave an emphatic “no”. Ive been told i should mutually masturbate with my wife. Both times i questioned them and they responded quite authoritative.

Priests regularly opt to relax the law rather than admonish the faithful according to the Teachings of the Catholic faith. Its no wonder we have such ignorrant Catholics and those of us falling into temptation and Catholics practicing masturbation, contraception, divorce, remarriage, and a host of other things contrary to the faith. Our priests are trying to be “buddies” over representing Jesus.

Sometimes our conscience might be telling us our pastor is not correct.
 
Last edited:
You are right I was too flat. I suppose I must recant to some degree. But does that mean the cardinals and the pope are curtently all in the wrong reguarding their silence on the forementioned teaching? (Pope for writing it without explanation and the cardinals for little or no contesting). Is that possible?
 
Last edited:
I really can’t comment on a book I have not read. How many on this thread have actually read it?
 
rcwitness said:
How can it be a matter of fallible priests to discern?
Click to expand...
Pretty much every moral decision is a matter at some point of a fallible person discerning something. Morals can be doctrine, but how they apply to a individuals is a bit dicier. We will always lack the insight that God alone has. St. Paul advised a more direct approach when he advised. "Let each man examine himself’ to determine worthiness for communion.
 
It may not be the best journalism, but Michael Voris is hardly an apostate.
 
That seems like easy,very easy to answer…
You have always had easy access,resources and technology to tribunals…
What is the percentage of annulments from US in the whole picture?
You had them at hand, you made use and why not abuse perhaps.of requests…?.of annulments.
This wasn t current use at all everywhere else.
What calls your attention that a couple,even many many years after married ,all right,not as the Church says,can be helped by a priest experienced in accompaniment and discernment.?
I do not even need to be Catholic to understand the practical part of some of the difficulties…
Do not take me wrong,but some of the answers take only a bit of socio-economical geography…
Some of the answers,none of my business though ,but I can certainly understand…
Lord,be merciful with all of us who have it so easy for what most of the world have to struggle as if it were luxury…
And it is a disgrace to keep speaking about what one doesn’t know a thing,reason why I will shut up.
 
Last edited:
But St Paul condemned what some were doing.
 
Last edited:
I believe I did,Rau…
Do not over think it.
Maybe I was too simple and practical in the example.
No worries
 
Last edited:
rcwitness said:
You see, that if we base its justification on saying “its just a practice” then, by that principle, what is preventing complete admission to the Eucharist for all situations of unrepented sins? And by unrepented, i mean “not turned from”.

And as i was saying before, what one pastor might believe is an unjustified situation to receive, another might feel justified.

How can it be a matter of fallible priests to discern? I think Pope Francis is trusting that our priests are wiser than they actually are.

Ive been told by priests, that i should use condoms (under my situation). I wrote the diocese to know if a priest was able to advise people that. They gave an emphatic “no”. Ive been told i should mutually masturbate with my wife. Both times i questioned them and they responded quite authoritative.

Priests regularly opt to relax the law rather than admonish the faithful according to the Teachings of the Catholic faith. Its no wonder we have such ignorrant Catholics and those of us falling into temptation and Catholics practicing masturbation, contraception, divorce, remarriage, and a host of other things contrary to the faith. Our priests are trying to be “buddies” over representing Jesus.

Sometimes our conscience might be telling us our pastor is not correct.
Click to expand...
A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.
 
Rau said:
It’s only purpose is to exercise some control over births - actually, over conception. It can help you achieve or avoid. Am I missing your point?
Click to expand...
Exactly… the purpose of NFP is to exercise some control over births which happens to be the same motive of contraceptives
 
Pre marital sex is not love, but hatred. You don’t love those people who you’re dragging into sin, you hate them.
 
The purpose of going to work at an honest job is to get more money. The purpose of beating a woman over the head and stealing her purse is to get more money.

I guess they’re exactly the same!
 
Last edited:
godisgood77 said:
Exactly… the purpose of NFP is to exercise some control over births which happens to be the same motive of contraceptives
Click to expand...
No, the purpose of NFP is to exercise some control over whether to engage in sexual intercourse or not. That is not the purpose of contraceptives.
 
JimG said:
No, the purpose of NFP is to exercise some control over whether to engage in sexual intercourse or not. That is not the purpose of contraceptives.
Click to expand...
We’ll have to disagree. The vast majority of people I have met using NFP classify if as their preferred method of birth control and their primary purpose of using they method is to avoid pregnancy. Likewise, the vast majority of people that I have encountered who use other forms of birth control are trying to avoid pregnancy. The motive is the same for all of those people.

Your position is great on paper, but seems disconnected from reality.
 
So, those using NFP avoid pregnancy by avoiding sex. Those using contraceptives do not avoid sex. Seems completely different to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top