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

[Reuben_J]

Here is the logic:

We are not to meddle, stop or prevent the natural precreating function of our body artificially. God created us and creation (of life) is His alone.

On the other hand, abstinence (for sex) is allowed. There were instances where that happened.

 

[Rau]

No I don’t directly imply it… i’m calling in to question the logic of outlawing one means vs another when the intention is the same.

I’m open to being convinced, but haven’t heard a convincing argument yet…

Then you call into question the principles of catholic moral theology. Are you familiar with the 3 fonts?

Acts can be condemned quite apart from their Intention. Thus different acts, having the same Intention, need not be both good or both evil.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a4.htm

 

[SuperLuigi]

That was his right and his privilege and all anyone could say in the face of the authority a Pope has is: “So be it.”

If this is the best argument you have, the Vatican is in serious trouble. Do you really expect people to just along with on that note?

Forget it.

 

[Rau]

I fully agree with the Pope’s decision to not respond to the dubia.

What is the basis / reasoning that leads you to conclude that the Pope chooses the better path by not responding?