Papal exhortation avoids clear statement on Communion

  • Thread starter Thread starter _Abyssinia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
otjm said:
The exhortation is clear that priests need to be working with couples in irregular marriages, and there is nothing whatsoever which indicates that this is a short process over a short time.

For starters, we don’t know that when a priest works with the couple, that Communion will be the eventual destination.

Further, we do not know that in working with that couple, that it will not be resolved with the couple living as brother and sister.

Added to that, we do not know how successful the couple may be in achieving that constantly - which is no different than any other major sin, most of which, if it has been a problem over years, has elements of habitual overlay - which the CCC speaks to.

So the likelihood s that it will remove confusion rather than increase it.

As to confusion over the indissolubility of marriage, that is already rampant within baptized Catholics, particularly about 2 generations of them who had at best minimal catechesis. The Exhortation may well be the starting point of improvement on that with these generations.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you thought I said divored and remarried?
I only said divorced…
 
If moral theologians reach no consensus, much less unanimity, what is the Catholic in the pew in a D&R situation to follow or one with a loved one in such a situation to understand?

I love this Pope for whom I pray. On plain reading of AL, however, I can’t help but be confused with what he is saying. Why can’t he be clear in his exhortation?

AL:Pope Francis has created confusion where we needed clarity.

thetablet.co.uk/blogs/1/919/amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-has-created-confusion-where-we-needed-clarity#comments

,
 
InSearchofGrace said:
If moral theologians reach no consensus, much less unanimity, what is the Catholic in the pew in a D&R situation to follow or one with a loved one in such a situation to understand?

I love this Pope for whom I pray. On plain reading of AL, however, I can’t help but be confused with what he is saying. Why can’t he be clear in his exhortation?

AL:Pope Francis has created confusion where we needed clarity.

thetablet.co.uk/blogs/1/919/amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-has-created-confusion-where-we-needed-clarity#comments

,
Click to expand...
I am also confused as are many others. I read the blog from your link and in my opinion he makes some good points. Thanks for sharing.👍
 
JimG said:
Apparently there is no unanimity among moral theologians as to the interpretation of the document:

Moral Theologians and Amoris Laetitia: Some Expert Assessments
Click to expand...
It is a good article, though I do not think I agree that the first category is a category, as much as a reason for differences. This category is, “those who see the document in continuity with previous papal teaching on marriage and the family.” It is clear from reading the document with its vast notation that Pope Francis views this part as a given. However, if the various theologians do not agree on exactly what is, “previous papal teaching on marriage and the family,” as opposed to discipline based on what is best (prudence), then all that view this document in light of Church teaching can see it differently.

I also take issue with the problem of “subjectivism” as a bad thing. It is simply a thing, neither good nor bad. Subjectivism can be the root of moral relativism or the foundation of subsidiarity and the foundation of the Church teaching on the Conscience. Furthermore, I believe subjectivism is both an unavoidable and vital part of the human condition. Also, I do not see it in conflict with the concept of moral absolutes or divine authority.

But yes, overall , a good article. Perhaps I was being too nitpicky, finding fault with the way the author legitimately used that word.
 
Instant access to information and communication is both a blessing and a curse.
I guess it depends on how much peace and trust the individual brings to the table beforehand.
 
Blue_Horizon said:
I suspect the allowance of Communion at death is more likely a compassionate and reasonable concession to what is essentially a disciplinary norm as PNewton suggests.
Click to expand...
If someone is properly disposed to receive communion he may do so to his benefit. If he is not properly disposed to receive it then reception is a grave sin. Where does compassion enter into this? We don’t call it compassionate to give someone that which he may legitimately receive, and giving someone something that is seriously harmful can be called many things, but compassionate is not one of them.

Ender
 
otjm said:
There is questioning whether certain matters are doctrine or discipline.
Click to expand...
The term discipline can be ambiguous. It may mean nothing more than rules the church has instituted to regularize certain practices that she herself has defined. Other disciplines, however - such as the ones referred to here - are the rules defined as necessary to enforce doctrines. In these cases there is very little freedom to change the disciplines, and they certainly cannot be changed in any way that fails to enforce the doctrines on which they are based.

There are specific doctrines involved here, among them are:
  • a valid marriage may be terminated only by death.
  • a person who divorces from a valid marriage and “remarries” commits adultery
  • adultery is a grave sin
  • sins cannot be absolved without contrition
  • contrition requires the intent not to repeat the sin
  • a person may not receive communion if aware of an un-absolved, grave sin
There are disciplines in place to enforce these doctrines, and they may not be changed in such a way as to ignore or reverse the doctrines on which they are based. That is, it isn’t at all clear how the disciplines in place to day can be changed if they would permit something that is counter to any of those doctrines.

Ender
 
Brendan_64 said:
Bishop Schneider calls for the Holy Father to issue clarification on how AL is to be interpreted.

vericatholici.wordpress.com/2016/04/25/bishop-athanasius-schneider-speaks-on-amoris-laetitia/
Click to expand...
Yes!
…*The See of Peter, that is, the sovereign Pontiff, is the guarantor of the unity of the faith and of apostolic sacramental discipline. Considering the confusion regarding sacramental practice in respect of the divorced and remarried, and the many differing interpretations of AL amongst priests and bishops, one may consider justified the call on our beloved Pope Francis, the Vicar of Christ, the “sweet Christ on earth” (St. Catherine of Siena), to order the publication of an authentic interpretation of AL, which must necessarily contain the explicit proclamation of the disciplinary principle of the universal and infallible Magisterium concerning the admission of divorced and remarried couples to the sacraments, according to the formulation in Familiaris Consortio 84.
Click to expand...
In the great Arian confusion of the fourth century, St. Basil the Great made an urgent appeal to the pope of Rome, asking him to give though his word a clear direction, so as finally to ensure unity in the thought of faith and charity (cf. Ep. 70).
Click to expand...
An authentic interpretation of AL by the Apostolic See would bring to the entire Church (claritatis laetitia) the joy in clarity. Such clarity will ensure the joy in love (amoris laetitia), a love and a joy that would not be “according to the minds of men, but to the mind of God” (Mt 16, 23). And this is what counts for the joy, the life and the eternal salvation of the divorced and remarried, and of all men.*
Click to expand...
The Holy Father authored AL and it would help if he provides direct answers, perhaps in more formal setting with a prepared speech or official release on the authentic interpretation of AL. It appears that fielding questions during inflight interviews is not one of his strengths. Spontaneous responses that he does not remember the footnote or that questions on his exhortation be directed to Cardinal Schonborn only served to add to conflicting interpretations.
,
 
It does concern me sometimes that lack of clarity might actually be delierate and that things are being manipulated (by someone or some group) in order to allow things to be left open to interpretation so that some unorthodox practices can start to develop. I don’t think the Holy Father is behind this, but it does make you wonder what is behind all this.

We need clarity, not ambiguity.
 
Brendan_64 said:
It does concern me sometimes that lack of clarity might actually be delierate and that things are being manipulated (by someone or some group) in order to allow things to be left open to interpretation so that some unorthodox practices can start to develop. I don’t think the Holy Father is behind this, but it does make you wonder what is behind all this.

We need clarity, not ambiguity.
Click to expand...
You are not the only one with this concern. I have read opinions on this subject from other people and they are wondering the same thing. We really do need some clarity.
 
JosieN said:
You are not the only one with this concern. I have read opinions on this subject from other people and they are wondering the same thing. We really do need some clarity.
Click to expand...
If you read the exhortation, it doesn’t seem all that unclear. The exhortation itself details why it is not possible to write specific rules due to the many disparate possibilities that people find themselves in today, especially if they’ve been out of the Church for a long time.

Many who find it unclear seem to say so because they just happen to dislike what it says.
 
OraLabora said:
If you read the exhortation, it doesn’t seem all that unclear. The exhortation itself details why it is not possible to write specific rules due to the many disparate possibilities that people find themselves in today, especially if they’ve been out of the Church for a long time.

Many who find it unclear seem to say so because they just happen to dislike what it says.
Click to expand...
I think that complexity is being confused with lack of clarity. Life is complex. People are complex. Everything cannot be reduced to a short list of simple rules. That is not due to a lack of clarity; its an acknowledgment of complexity.
 
OraLabora said:
If you read the exhortation, it doesn’t seem all that unclear. The exhortation itself details why it is not possible to write specific rules due to the many disparate possibilities that people find themselves in today, especially if they’ve been out of the Church for a long time.

Many who find it unclear seem to say so because they just happen to dislike what it says.
Click to expand...
I think, and this is just my opinion, that they think there may be a “hidden agenda” behind it, If governments and groups want change sometimes they need to do things in a different way to get the results they want and they think that is what might be happening here. They wonder if being unclear was intentiontional because it allows everyone to make their own interpretation. This would allow change without the normal processes and approval. It is just a thought, so please don’t write me a page about how wrong it is, as I did not say it was right.
 
TMC said:
I think that complexity is being confused with lack of clarity. Life is complex. People are complex. Everything cannot be reduced to a short list of simple rules. That is not due to a lack of clarity; its an acknowledgment of complexity.
Click to expand...
People are no more complex than they were in the past. However I think there is a greater sense of entitlement to want to be able to live their lives as they please without anyone saying that they are wrong to do so.
 
Brendan_64 said:
People are no more complex than they were in the past. However I think there is a greater sense of entitlement to want to be able to live their lives as they please without anyone saying that they are wrong to do so.
Click to expand...
Who said anything about people being anymore complex?
 
TMC said:
Who said anything about people being anymore complex?
Click to expand...
So why the particular need for ‘nuances’ today and the need to accommodate and allow for such complexities today when such an approach was not needed for 2,000 years? Has the Church gotten it wrong for so long?
 
Brendan_64 said:
So why the particular need for ‘nuances’ today and to accommodate and allow for such complexities today when such an approach was not needed for 2,000 years? Has the Church gotten it wrong for so long?
Click to expand...
Should the Church stop trying to do better and teach better, just because it is old? The Church has been working toward a better understanding for 2,000 years, which is what Francis is doing now.
 
Oh Dear! Very little that Pope Francis says is clear. To avoid confusion, follow the already defined Dogmas and Doctrines of the Church and don’t get wrapped up in exhortations that aren’t binding. Makes life much easier. 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top