Jimmy Akin's response to.open letter

[tafan2]

Is you claim, then, that everyone criticizing the pope is in error while Akin is correct?

I know it wasn’t addressed to me, but I will respond with my view anyway.
I believe there are legitimate criticisms of Pope Francis. But I claim that in the recent letter accusing Pope Francis of heresy, they are all in error and Akin is correct.

 

[KMG]

The fundamental error of the Akin position…which is essential an ultramontane position…is a misunderstanding of the profoundly limited nature of papal infallibility.

The pope is protected from error when he makes ex cathedra statements. There is no guarantee that the pope cannot fall into error or deviate from the faith in other circumstances. One need only study the history of the Third Council of Constantinople and the case of Pope Honorius.

Ultimately the key point in these discussions is to remember that the pope is a servant of tradition. He is not an absolute monarch with the power to do whatever he wants. He is a servant of what was handed down to him from his predecessors.

 

[Ender]

Is you claim, then, that everyone criticizing the pope is in error while Akin is correct?

Not at all. I don’t deal in generalizations. An open letter was written charging the pope with formal heresy. That is an extremely high standard, and it appears to me that Akin’s argument is that the letter fails to meet it. That’s all.

Here’s a post by Edward Feser, who essentially reaches the same conclusion while recognizing that the impetus behind the letter is based on some very valid concerns.

… it simply will not do for critics of the letter to point to its deficiencies and then roll over and go back to sleep. The letter, however problematic, is a response to statements and actions of the pope that are also seriously problematic.

 

[rightness]

What you are forgetting is that even our Catholic faith rightly teaches that, even when sin is forgiven, there still exists temporal punishment (whether in the form of natural consequences or structured chastisement willed by God) for those sins. Yes, our Father in heaven can and will forgive a sexual child abuser who sincerely repents, but that does not mean that there should not be severe consequences for those who have sinned gravely in this area. Even King David found this out the hard way in regard to punishment following forgiveness.

But that doesn’t apply to this world. We don’t seek out justice for Temporal Punishments. Only God can judge that.

Let’s say that same repentant sexual abuser has been absolved through confession. Throwing them in jail isn’t going to be an effective form of penance, nor is it a good way to rehabilitate them. We don’t know what’s going on or if Pope Francis is doing what he can to bring back these lost sheep, but I’m saying there is secrecy to be had when it comes to the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

It’s like the time of the Spanish Inquisition, which has been severely misunderstood and exaggerated by secular media, the Church has done everything to rehabilitate heretical beliefs to bring back lost sheep, and it has been extremely successful in protecting from mobs, rehabilitating them, and providing a fair trial. Then comes the state, the monarchs decide to take things into their own hands and start burning people “in the name of God”, but the Church never intended that. What’s so different about this current problem and the time of the inquisition? What if the state decides to judge with capital punishment on these sexual abusers?

We’re called to forgive, not to seek out the punishment of others. Anger only leads to further separation from Christ. Imagine these 19 theologians will go their separate way from the Church because they think the Pope is heretical. It’s better to pray for the offenders, forgive them, and belief our Father in Rome has it under control. It’s really not a big deal in context of Church history. It’s just a big deal because of how secular society is influencing us.

 

[tafan2]

Akin never made any claim about this. His claim against the accusers of heresy does not rest the least on any understanding of papal infallibility.

 

[KMG]

This is why I said, “the fundamental error of the Akin position.”

As for the issue of the “qualifications” of the writers of the open letter that Akin opined about…as I stated above, it is the height of of irony for Akin to be critiquing qualifications about theology when he has none.

 

[tafan2]

This is why I said, “the fundamental error of the Akin position.”

That makes no sense. He explains infallible dogma in quite a bit of detail. He in no way says that the Pope’s statements which the letter calls into question are infallible. That is not what he is basing his argument on.
Or do you have a problem with his explanation about infallible dogma?

 

[AlNg]

“10 Things You Need to Know About Why I’m Not a Fan of Jimmy Akin.”

What did you say were those 10 things we need to know about this?

 

[gracepoole]

gracepoole:

“10 Things You Need to Know About Why I’m Not a Fan of Jimmy Akin.”

What did you say were those 10 things we need to know about this?

1. The beard.

I kid! I kid! No one rip into me for a joke, please.

 

[irenaeus1]

But that doesn’t apply to this world. We don’t seek out justice for Temporal Punishments. Only God can judge that.

Temporal punishment does not only apply to this world… not sure where you received this notion. As to God judging, you are absolutely right. But again, this does not preclude man from exacting just punishment for crimes committed even for the remorseful.

Let’s say that same repentant sexual abuser has been absolved through confession. Throwing them in jail isn’t going to be an effective form of penance, nor is it a good way to rehabilitate them.

Would you say the same thing about a rapist or a murderer? Namely, that provided they have repented and have been absolved through confession, then no jail time?

We don’t know what’s going on or if Pope Francis is doing what he can to bring back these lost sheep, but I’m saying there is secrecy to be had when it comes to the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

The problem with this is the people with whom Pope Francis has surrounded himself. Just look at all the bad decisions Pope Francis has already made, either on his own or through poor advice of others. For example:

Pope Francis overruled advice given to him by the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith about two priests - lessening their ‘penalty’ allowing them to be punished by a lifetime of prayer (notice that Pope Francis was still administering punishment to them, albeit, a mush lesser sentence). One of them being the notorious Fr. Mauro Inzoli. Pope Benedict defrocked Fr. Inzoli in 2012 for molesting little boys in the confessional. Yet, when Pope Francis came into office, he reinstated him to the priesthood and withheld evidence from the Italian authorities during the criminal investigation into his atrocities. Pope Francis only reversed course and defrocked him again later after the courts sentenced him (also, new allegations have been forthcoming).

Cardinal Godfried Danneels was caught on tape instructing an abuse victim to keep silent and instead blame himself for the abuse (not to mention his advocacy of other heterodox and immoral views), yet Pope Francis handpicked Danneels to participate in the Synod on the Family.

Pope Francis rejected and ignored numerous pleas for years regarding the inappropriateness of naming Bishop Barros to a Chilean diocese. When confronted with this while himself in Chile, he called the accusers liars guilty of slander or calumny. He only reversed course later apologizing for his grave error in judgment (due to not having all the information).

Monsignor Battista Ricca was handpicked by Pope Francis as head of household; Ricca is a walking advertisement for all that is perverse in the so-called “gay lobby.”

To a communications post within the Vatican, Pope Francis selected Fr. James Martin, who openly advocates the normalization of the gay lifestyle and wants the Catechism changed in this regard.

etc., etc., etc.

 

[rightness]

Temporal punishment does not only apply to this world… not sure where you received this notion. As to God judging, you are absolutely right. But again, this does not preclude man from exacting just punishment for crimes committed even for the remorseful.

Because you brought up temporal punishment in the discussion. What relevance is there for someone is alive and repentant.

What you really wanted to say is that if the Cardinal is charged with a crime by the state, then the Cardinal should go to jail based on the nation’s laws, but that hasn’t happened. There are no jails in the Catholic Church.

Would you say the same thing about a rapist or a murderer? Namely, that provided they have repented and have been absolved through confession, then no jail time?

Have you ever heard of stories where clergymen going to jail for failing to alert the authorities of crimes confessed in the confessional? God’s laws are greater than state laws. If the state can find evidence of the crime outside of confession, then the criminal will go to jail. Other than that, Pope Francis won’t throw his sheep to the wolves by revealing secrets.

The problem with this is the people with whom Pope Francis has surrounded himself. Just look at all the bad decisions Pope Francis has already made, either on his own or through poor advice of others. For example:

Pope Francis overruled advice… (shortened for word limit)

etc., etc., etc.

Jesus handpicked Peter to the the keyholder of the Kingdom of Heaven knowing Peter would commit the worst sin against God in denying Jesus. I think you need to look at all your examples through the eyes of Divine Mercy. People don’t get better by condemning them to jail, and Jesus would use Peter as the best example of making the worst of sheep into the best of sheep.

 

[AlNg]

The beard.

It seems that God does not want men to shave their beards:
[Leviticus 19:27]
'You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard.

[Leviticus 21:5]'They shall not make any baldness on their heads, nor shave off the edges of their beards, nor make any cuts in their flesh.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Feanor2]

I have never heard the descriptor “servant of tradition” applied to the Pope. Is that a thing or did you just make it up?

 

[Joe_5859]

But I do think there is a shift in theology that will have to be clarified by this Pope or it will be erased

I kind of agree with this. This is part of what confuses me about the approach of those who write open letters like these. If they really believe the pope is intentionally using fuzzy and ambiguous language with the goal of opening the door for heterodox positions, I would think the smart move would be to ignore it and wait for the next pope to come by so that all the ambiguity can be ignored and discarded.

If Pope Francis really holds these questionable positions that he is accused of holding, why would his critics want to force him to state those positions in clearer language that is more difficult to explain away? Wouldn’t it be better to wait it out?

 

[irenaeus1]

Because you brought up temporal punishment in the discussion. What relevance is there for someone is alive and repentant.

I don’t know - perhaps we may be talking past one another. I brought up temporal punishment because you appeared to say that if one repents and receives absolution, then no punishment should be imposed on the now-forgiven offender (for example, no jail time) and that allotting punishment is somehow unmerciful and unforgiving. What I’m saying is that not even God treats us that way. God can and does impose temporal punishment even for sins that are already forgiven - and yes, while we are still alive and repentant. And of course God can certainly use civil authorities to exact punishment as well, as indicated by Paul in Romans 13:1-4.

 

[KMG]

Indeed, sins result in temporal punishment. Even if one is repentant and absolved, sins result in temporal punishment.

 

[rightness]

rightness:

Because you brought up temporal punishment in the discussion. What relevance is there for someone is alive and repentant.

I don’t know - perhaps we may be talking past one another. I brought up temporal punishment because you appeared to say that if one repents and receives absolution, then no punishment should be imposed on the now-forgiven offender (for example, no jail time) and that allotting punishment is somehow unmerciful and unforgiving. What I’m saying is that not even God treats us that way. God can and does impose temporal punishment even for sins that are already forgiven - and yes, while we are still alive and repentant. And of course God can certainly use civil authorities to exact punishment as well, as indicated by Paul in Romans 13:1-4.

Yeah, I was talking about Earthly punishment, which is jail. Like what Jesus said about paying taxes in Mark 12:13-17, used in the context of today, let the punishment of the state be rendered by the state, and let the punishment of Heaven be rendered by Heaven. The child abuser’s crime can answer to two authority, and if Pope Francis has already dealt with it according to the Heavenly authority, the state can deal with it if it wishes to proceed with an investigation.

However, knowing how much of a failure the US prison system is, I would put more faith in the Catholic way of rehabilitating the offenders.

 

[irenaeus1]

However, knowing how much of a failure the US prison system is, I would put more faith in the Catholic way of rehabilitating the offenders.

Oh my, given the current crisis in the Church, I trust the U.S. criminal justice system way more than many in the Catholic Church who have a misguided idea of mercy. And as already noted above in this thread, Pope Francis has made some serious missteps in his handling of sexual abuse cases. He most definitely was not dealing with them according to heavenly authority. In fact, Pope Francis had to reverse a number of his own decisions when it was found that others in the church or even those of the secular state were found to be the ones who were correct.

 

[irenaeus1]

The child abuser’s crime can answer to two authority, and if Pope Francis has already dealt with it according to the Heavenly authority, the state can deal with it if it wishes to proceed with an investigation.

Also, it’s quite difficult for the state to deal with sexual predators when it was members of Church leadership who were running interference and covering up the immoral crimes.

 

[13pollitos]

Oh my, given the current crisis in the Church, I trust the U.S. criminal justice system way more than many in the Catholic Church who have a misguided idea of mercy.

I don’t trust either when it comes to dealing with child sex abuse cases. At all.