Jesuit general: all doctrine is subject to discernment [CWN]

[St_Francis]

To at all. Even scholarship must be discerned, reflected on and prayed about.

Yes, but apparently we do not have to pay attention to the results of the discernment of others, only our own, according to Fr Sosa.

 

[Ginny89]

St. Ignatius must be performing sommersaults in his grave.

 

[Ginny89]

It’s this kind of nonsense that is leading to the widespread questioning of certain clergy and their motives in today’s Church. It is very difficult to know who to trust and who is giving sound pastoral advice when such things are said and tacitly approved by higher authority in the Church. We may be reaching the point of no return soon. Things like AL are just symptoms of the problem. The real problem is that a small, but significant and influential number of the Church’s leaders may not fully believe in the teachings of the Church. Eventually there will have to be a day of reckoning where some from within the Church will have to stand up and fight this tide of relativism at the risk of causing a schism, and that day may be closer than many would believe.

That’s the thing. Some in the hierarchy arent really buying what the church is selling, but rather than being honest, they decide to drag the whole church into crisis. If God is true, if Christ founded the church, if Our Lady’s promises are true, I expect some kind of grand miracle will set things right. I dont see much else undoing the scandal this has created.

 

[Ginny89]

I don’t remember St Ignatius teaching discernment of doctrine anywhere! I think this now explains the current crisis. Some people already believe this Buddhist doctrine of discernment of everything for oneself as the first dogma, which leaves little room for faith. Nowonder then that they feel bold enough to set aside the words of the person they claim to believe is the incarnated second person of the Godhead! After all, when they thought about it, they “felt peace and consolation”, nevermind that the only certain guide given has been the magisterium. Nope! The only certain guide is now how one feels once they decide to set aside this or that doctrine.

 

[po18guy]

Considering this: “When the interviewer remarked that an individual’s discernment might lead him to a conclusion at odds with Catholic doctrine, the Jesuit superior replied: ‘That is so, because doctrine does not replace discernment, nor does it [replace the] Holy Spirit.’”

So basically it sounds like he *is *tossing out 2000 years’ worth of scholarship. Discernment is all!

Precisely! Jesus gave commands which we must keep if we hope to inherit everlasting life. If God is immutable, then revealed truth is not subject to cultural ‘discernment’ other than whether or not to embrace it. After all, the faith was delivered once for all to the Saints.

And this canard about the Holy Spirit - Who must certainly be weary of hearing about His supposed leadership! The Spirit leads to unity, not division. To obedience, not rebellion. To meekness, not individuality. To discipleship, not flights of fancy.

 

[Stat_Crux]

What he is proposing, that all should interpret Scripture independently of any obligation to Dogma or the Church’s constant teaching, seems virtually indistinguishable from the protestant doctrine of “private judgement”, in which the individual becomes the sole authority for interpreting scripture and determining God’s teachings.

It would be problematic to suggest that private conscience is the sole arbiter of discerning the divine will, as there is nothing to stop people arriving at contradictory answers. Simply saying “it is the will of the Holy Spirit” has been claimed by every schismatic and heretic who opposed the Church since the beginning.

I struggle to understand why so many recently have been publicly stating that they hate what the Church has been for the past 2,000 years and that it has been teaching error all that time; until 2016 when private conscience was suddenly rediscovered and now trumps everything that came before. Wasn’t that the argument of the protestants? That the Church had departed from the “true faith” and taught error and that they needed to go “back to the beginning”? What happened to the hermeneutic of continuity of interpreting the Church’s teaching in the context of 2,000 years of rich pastoral and theological learning?

The interview in Italian is here, Google translate works well enough:

rossoporpora.org/rubriche/interviste-a-personalita/672-gesuiti-padre-sosa-parole-di-gesu-da-contestualizzare.html

Q: Cardinal Gerhard L. Műller, prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, has said with regard to marriage that the words of Jesus are very clear and “no power in heaven and on earth, neither an angel nor the pope, neither a council nor a law of the bishops has the faculty to modify them.”

A: So then, there would have to be a lot of reflection on what Jesus really said. At that time, no one had a recorder to take down his words. What is known is that the words of Jesus must be contextualized, they are expressed in a language, in a specific setting, they are addressed to someone in particular.

Q: But if all the worlds of Jesus must be examined and brought back to their historical context, they do not have an absolute value.

A: Over the last century in the Church there has been a great blossoming of studies that seek to understand exactly what Jesus meant to say… That is not relativism, but attests that the word is relative, the Gospel is written by human beings, it is accepted by the Church which is made up of human persons… So it is true that no one can change the word of Jesus, but one must know what it was!

Q: Is it also possible to question the statement in Matthew 19:3-6: “What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder”?

A: I go along with what Pope Francis says. One does not bring into doubt, one brings into discernment. . .

Q: But discernment is evaluation, it is choosing among different options. There is no longer an obligation to follow just one interpretation. . .

A: No, the obligation is still there, but to follow the result of discernment.

Q: However, the final decision is based on a judgment relative to different hypotheses. So it also takes into consideration the hypothesis that the phrase “let man not put asunder…” is not exactly as it appears. In short, it brings the word of Jesus into doubt.

A: Not the word of Jesus, but the word of Jesus as we have interpreted it. Discernment does not select among different hypotheses but listens to the Holy Spirit, who - as Jesus has promised - helps us to understand the signs of God’s presence in human history.

Q: But discern how?

A: Pope Francis does discernment following St. Ignatius, like the whole Society of Jesus: one has to seek and find, St. Ignatius said, the will of God. It is not a frivolous search. Discernment leads to a decision: one must not only evaluate, but decide.

Q: And who must decide?

A: The Church has always reiterated the priority of personal conscience.

Q: So if conscience, after discernment, tells me that I can receive communion even if the norm does not provide for it…

A: The Church has developed over the centuries, it is not a piece of reinforced concrete. It was born, it has learned, it has changed. This is why the ecumenical councils are held, to try to bring developments of doctrine into focus. Doctrine is a word that I don’t like very much, it brings with it the image of the hardness of stone. Instead the human reality is much more nuanced, it is never black or white, it is in continual development.

Q: I seem to understand that for you there is a priority for the practice of the discernment of doctrine.

A: Yes, but doctrine is part of discernment. True discernment cannot dispense with doctrine.

Q: But it can reach conclusions different from doctrine.

A: That is so, because doctrine does not replace discernment, nor does it the Holy Spirit.

By “So it is true that no one can change the word of Jesus, but one must know what it was!” he is stating that we can search for but never know the true meaning of Scripture

By “No, the obligation is still there, but to follow the result of discernment” he states that the obligation is to follow whatever conclusion you have “discerned” without reference to what the Church teaches and regardless of contradictions.

“Discernment does not select among different hypotheses but listens to the Holy Spirit”. Does, or can, the Holy Spirit encourage people to carry out contradictory actions? Could the Holy Spirit guide one person to respect Jesus’ teachings on the sinfulness of adultery and sex outside of marriage, and another person to reject it and demand to receive Communion?

“That is so, because doctrine does not replace discernment, nor does it the Holy Spirit”. There isn’t much to say on this one. I’m speechless.

I pray that the Holy Father will swiftly intervene and correct this error.

 

[JPUSC]

It’s this kind of nonsense that is leading to the widespread questioning of certain clergy and their motives in today’s Church. It is very difficult to know who to trust and who is giving sound pastoral advice when such things are said and tacitly approved by higher authority in the Church. We may be reaching the point of no return soon. Things like AL are just symptoms of the problem. The real problem is that a small, but significant and influential number of the Church’s leaders may not fully believe in the teachings of the Church. Eventually there will have to be a day of reckoning where some from within the Church will have to stand up and fight this tide of relativism at the risk of causing a schism, and that day may be closer than many would believe.

 

[JPUSC]

That’s the thing. Some in the hierarchy arent really buying what the church is selling, but rather than being honest, they decide to drag the whole church into crisis. If God is true, if Christ founded the church, if Our Lady’s promises are true, I expect some kind of grand miracle will set things right. I dont see much else undoing the scandal this has created.

 

[Fiasco]

He says that they didn’t have tape recorders so how do we know what Jesus truly said. Well they didn’t have video cameras either, so how do we know if Jesus truly resurrected? So the Holy Spirit speaks to him directly, but it was unable to keep error out of the
Bible. I discern I don’t need him, or his ideas.

So much for the Church’s teaching that Scripture is inspired.
Galatians 1:8 and 1:9 applies.

 

[Memaw]

Sigh… :doh2:

In other words: I can believe whatever I want, as long as I perform the right mental gymnastics. (Or invoke the Holy Spirit).

Sounds like the “name of the game” today, doesn’t it. I will follow the TRUE teachings of the Catholic Church and not someone’s discernments!!! God Bless, Memaw

 

[Ormond]

Everybody discerns. Everybody chooses which flavor of Catholicism is best for them. And nobody really knows what flavor is best for somebody else. We’re darn lucky if we know what flavor is best for us.

 

[TMC]

That’s the thing. Some in the hierarchy arent really buying what the church is selling, but rather than being honest, they decide to drag the whole church into crisis. If God is true, if Christ founded the church, if Our Lady’s promises are true, I expect some kind of grand miracle will set things right. I dont see much else undoing the scandal this has created.

You are seeing the grand miracle that is setting things right. It is happening before your eyes; just listen to our Pope as he leads us.

 

[JPUSC]

You are seeing the grand miracle that is setting things right. It is happening before your eyes; just listen to our Pope as he leads us.

He’s preoccupied at the moment.

youtu.be/0qi4YCDmBzM

 

[Wedge_Antilles]

Jesus’ words about marriage, divorce, and adultery are pretty clear. They have been clear since he spoke them. Shall we now discern his words out of existence, to make them conform to what we want?

My interpretation (or what I discerned, if you will) of the message here is that without definitive proof of Jesus words, preferably in two, corroborating formats - 1) NTSC/PAL on VHS and 2) the now hard to find HD DVD, or failing that a good Sony Laserdisc, we cannot be certain what he said.

Or we could ignore what we heard since most faithful Catholics know in their hearts the truth as revealed by 2000 years of our faith and keep pressing on. The faith in the Church and her teachings is never shaken; my faith in some people in the Church certainly is, but they come and go. Our concern should be (and I suspect is) for those not steeply grounded in our faith who are left to wander aimlessly with mixed-messages and cryptic non-answers.

 

[Ginny89]

You are seeing the grand miracle that is setting things right. It is happening before your eyes;

Capitulating to the ways of the world requires no miracle. Literally ANYBODY but Jesus could do it without breaking a sweat. Easy peasy. Even the blessed virgin. If that’s your definition of a miracle then you are easily impressed.

 

[Ormond]

Imho, there is a solution to this.

The problem, as I see it, is that we don’t want a solution, we enjoy the ideological conflict too much to let it go. The worst thing that could happen to many of us would be that everyone agreed with us, because then we’d have no way inflate our own sense of fantasy superiority.

What’s the solution then? It comes in a single word. Love.

Which of us has completed the process of mastering love? Anyone wish to raise their hand here? Jesus gave us plenty of work to do. None of us have finished that work. Arguing about ideology is just a place to hide from the job.

There is no need for discernment or faithful loyalty to some pile of papers in the Vatican if we’d just keep our focus on the job we’re supposed to be doing.

That’s how it discerns to me anyway.

 

[Pulvis]

Imho, there is a solution to this.

The problem, as I see it, is that we don’t want a solution, we enjoy the ideological conflict too much to let it go. The worst thing that could happen to many of us would be that everyone agreed with us, because then we’d have no way inflate our own sense of fantasy superiority.

What’s the solution then? It comes in a single word. Love.

Which of us has completed the process of mastering love? Anyone wish to raise their hand here? Jesus gave us plenty of work to do. None of us have finished that work. Arguing about ideology is just a place to hide from the job.

There is no need for discernment or faithful loyalty to some pile of papers in the Vatican if we’d just keep our focus on the job we’re supposed to be doing.

That’s how it discerns to me anyway.

I am sorry but “Love” and “Charity” are cheap screens behind which to hide what is happening within the Church. At some point, one must recognize that an element within The Church is attempting to change not only tradition, Tradition and Doctrine, but to do so in a most perfidious way. This is unconscionable!
In today’s Gospel we read:

“Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin,
it would be better for him if a great millstone
were put around his neck
and he were thrown into the sea.” St. Mark, ch.9 usccb.org/bible/readings/022317.cfm

I fear not for the Church! Our Lord promised it would stand. I fear for all the Faithful who will get caught up in this relativist mess and be led down the wrong path by those whom they trust to give them right direction.

wdtprs.com/blog/2017/02/has-the-head-of-the-jesuits-jettisoned-doctrine-and-the-words-of-the-lord-in-scripture/

This Lent, do penance for the return of Doctrinal clarity.

 

[billy15]

Imho, there is a solution to this.

The problem, as I see it, is that we don’t want a solution, we enjoy the ideological conflict too much to let it go. The worst thing that could happen to many of us would be that everyone agreed with us, because then we’d have no way inflate our own sense of fantasy superiority.

What’s the solution then? It comes in a single word. Love.

Which of us has completed the process of mastering love? Anyone wish to raise their hand here? Jesus gave us plenty of work to do. None of us have finished that work. Arguing about ideology is just a place to hide from the job.

There is no need for discernment or faithful loyalty to some pile of papers in the Vatican if we’d just keep our focus on the job we’re supposed to be doing.

That’s how it discerns to me anyway.

Yes, the solution is Love; but not in the warped way you’ve presented here…

1. God is love (1 John 4:8).
2. Jesus is God, the Word, made flesh (John 1:14).
3. Jesus said if we loved Him (Love/God incarnate), we would keep His commandments.
4. God the Son (Jesus) promised to send God the Holy Spirit (also love) to guide the Church, which He founded and is Head of, “in all things” after His Ascension. This same Holy Spirit will also bring to remembrance all things Jesus has said (John 14: 15-31).
5. Jesus, God the Son, is the Truth, the Way, and the Life. Jesus did not say He is several truths, but one Truth (John 14:6).
6. Therefore, following the commands that come from the Truth, God the Son Who is also Love, is the most supreme act of love any human can accomplish.

However, you may reject all this as I see your religion is listed as human. Perhaps you could elaborate on it, but the way I presently interpret your religious affiliation is that you place humans above God, making the human race into gods themselves. This is why it’s so easy for you to buy into the morally relativistic notions set forth by the Jesuit General.

Your caricature of Catholic doctrine, “a pile of papers at the Vatican”, proves you have no idea what you’re talking about regarding the Catholic outlook on truth and love. Catholics believe in the deposit of faith, and this is where we receive our truth, our doctrine, and our Sacred Tradition. It’s not stored on a desk at the Vatican. Please stop misrepresenting and belittling Catholic beliefs.

 

[JPUSC]

Yes, the solution is Love; but not in the warped way you’ve presented here…

1. God is love (1 John 4:8).
2. Jesus is God, the Word, made flesh (John 1:14).
3. Jesus said if we loved Him (Love/God incarnate), we would keep His commandments.
4. God the Son (Jesus) promised to send God the Holy Spirit (also love) to guide the Church, which He founded and is Head of, “in all things” after His Ascension. This same Holy Spirit will also bring to remembrance all things Jesus has said (John 14: 15-31).
5. Jesus, God the Son, is the Truth, the Way, and the Life. Jesus did not say He is several truths, but one Truth (John 14:6).
6. Therefore, following the commands that come from the Truth, God the Son Who is also Love, is the most supreme act of love any human can accomplish.

However, you may reject all this as I see your religion is listed as human. Perhaps you could elaborate on it, but the way I presently interpret your religious affiliation is that you place humans above God, making the human race into gods themselves. This is why it’s so easy for you to buy into the morally relativistic notions set forth by the Jesuit General.

Your caricature of Catholic doctrine, “a pile of papers at the Vatican”, proves you have no idea what you’re talking about regarding the Catholic outlook on truth and love. Catholics believe in the deposit of faith, and this is where we receive our truth, our doctrine, and our Sacred Tradition. It’s not stored on a desk at the Vatican. Please stop misrepresenting and belittling Catholic beliefs.

Pope Francis says: youtu.be/Nq7us5Lf5IU

 

[billy15]

Pope Francis says: youtu.be/Nq7us5Lf5IU

Pope Francis says to dialogue with others of different faiths…

What is the point you’re trying to make here? This video has nothing to do with my post. Just because four people say “I believe in love” doesn’t add to the conversation. Christians believe God is Love. Ormond mischaracterizes true love as being some kind of negative ideology.