Pope reacts to 'rigid' critics [CWN]

[josh987654321]

I’m glad he is still a Cardinal. I do not mind asking for clarification privately, but no need for public questioning IMHO. I know you and several here disagree and that is okay.

I agree, and I think most here agree also, from what I have heard, is apparently they couldn’t get an answer privately and that’s why it’s public? I don’t know, but I can’t imagine they would release it unless it was a last resort attempt or something?

I hope this has helped

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[josh987654321]

Not sure what you are asking.

If you are talking about the requested corrections to AL then go to this link:

dici.org/en/documents/the-apostolic-exhortation-amoris-laetitia-a-theological-critique/

Then scroll down to this title:
**Theological censures of propositions drawn from the Apostolic Exhortation **Amoris laetitia

It begins listing all the concerns citing the paragraph number in AL.

Hope this helps your question?

Thank you, it does help, I will read the concerns listed there. Now I have the original document, and their concerns including reference to the page number to cross reference them and make an informed decision.

God Bless You

Josh

 

[Convert_in_99]

KSU:
I didn’t realize the document was publicized. I’ve never heard of it until all the hype.

You certainly can discuss the document then, but not disparage/disrespect Pope Francis. (I didn’t say you had…just that it has been a common theme of this and a few other threads.)

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Yes, exactly! Our job (not including yourself Father ) as laity is to follow, not lead. Why we are discussing the morality of this document endlessly when we are lowest on the “totem pole” so to speak is beyond me. Even if you don’t agree, nothing will change sitting here bad-mouthing the Pope and other clergy. We don’t have the authority in the first place.

Ah but there is no need to not include me.

Canon Law provides clarity on matters of this sort.

• The first see is judged by no one.

Thus no human person at all, and no earthly power, may judge the Bishop of Rome, the Vicar of Christ. As the canon clearly says, too: By virtue of his office he possesses supreme, full, immediate, and universal ordinary power in the Church, which he is always able to exercise freely.

• Only the Pope may judge a Cardinal.

Thus there is absolutely no place for any intervention on my part – or the part of anyone else – to offer any critique of a Cardinal. I certainly accept that these four Cardinals are in need of remedial help. I have every confidence that their need for help will, ultimately, be dealt with.

His Holiness, I am also quite certain, will deal with those who compose his College of Cardinals as it pleases him and he sees fit. They owe him obedience, which they pledged in the moment he was elected…a promise Pope Benedict made in anticipation of the conclave and before he departed the Vatican for Castel Gandolfo.

There is, moreover, now in place the new Cardinal Prefect of the new dicastery with competence for the Laity, Family, and Life; he will guide the implementation of pastoral accompaniment in the aftermath of the last two synods and the post synodal apostolic exhortation…and he has demonstrated he quite understands it.

As for the statements of various bishops…they ultimately also owe obedience and submission to the Vicar of Christ, which they were obliged to promise before they received episcopal ordination. There is nothing for one who is not a bishop to give voice to in their regard…at all.

Beyond that, I have nothing to say about these more recent posts, except this: I am a priest and I am a theologian. I follow unreservedly the Successor of Saint Peter. Not only do I not have even the slightest word of criticism about His Holiness, I have rather words of very great praise for Pope Francis. Not only is there nothing that causes me concern, I have been happy to collaborate in what has resulted from the synods and from the exhortation in every way that I have been asked.

I am always mindful of the words of Pope Saint John Paul II in the face of what was shameless and reprehensible rebellion against the Successor of Peter in 1988. He wrote:
It is impossible to remain faithful to the Tradition while breaking the ecclesial bond with him to whom, in the person of the Apostle Peter, Christ himself entrusted the ministry of unity in his Church.
I have taken that as my measure: faithfulness to God, to Tradition and to the Church is co-extant with a total oneness of mind and heart with the Pope and a complete docility to him as he exercises the Petrine ministry.

Rather than focus, or even have any real interest, on four Cardinals, emeriti from their respective previous offices, who submitted, as a personal petition, dubia to which the Pope made the response he did, I have focused rather on the Cardinals who have contributed positively to the implementation of various aspects of pastoral care for people who are in need of pastoral care; their statements regarding the implementation of Amoris Laetitia I have found of much more utility as well as of much more interest.

 

[Chipper]

dubia

to which the Pope made the response he did, I have focused rather on the Cardinals who have contributed positively to the implementation of various aspects of pastoral care for people who are in need of pastoral care.

Thank you Father. I still have questions though. That is questions whereas isn’t “Truth” an overriding principle?

Also This is from a “Bishop” Bishop Athanasius Schneider:

*“In publishing a plea for clarity in a matter that touches the truth and the sanctity simultaneously of the three sacraments of Marriage, Penance, and the Eucharist, the Four Cardinals only did their basic duty as bishops and cardinals, which consists in actively contributing so that the revelation transmitted through the Apostles might be guarded sacredly and might be faithfully interpreted. It was especially the Second Vatican Council that reminded all the members of the college of bishops as legitimate successors of the Apostles of their obligation, according to which “by Christ’s institution and command they have to be solicitous for the whole Church, and that this solicitude, though it is not exercised by an act of jurisdiction, contributes greatly to the advantage of the universal Church. For it is the duty of all bishops to promote and to safeguard the unity of faith and the discipline common to the whole Church” (Lumen gentium, 23; cf. also Christus Dominus, 5-6).”

*Now I don’t intend to sound snippet, - how does “Duty” play into this?

 

[Usige]

No one has answered my question. Why has everyone waited until just recently to make a fuss? Why not when it came out?

First it takes time to read and digest it; to work through the implications. Even at that many clergy had serious concerns shortly after it was promulgated, but wanted to further study it before giving an analysis. I believe it was about a month or month and a half before my Bishop wrote about it, though he had written earlier saying that he was studying it. Remember that the dubia was submitted on September 19th or 6 months after the promulgation of AL. Given the length of AL it is not surprising that the Cardinals wanted to fully ruminate on the implications especially in light of St John Paul II teachings in Familiaris Consortio.

The fuss comes from the fact that there is a refusal to respond to the dubia. They are asking for clarification on how to sync FC with AL. When you have two papal documents that *seem *to allow for contradiction, then it is their duty to understand how these two documents mesh. The dubia is the standard way to ask for these type of clarifications. For instance it was a dubia that answered the question if a man that had a vasectomy needed a reversal if they confessed and had contrition. For all we know the Cardinals did ask to meet with the Holy Father and were refused; I’ve never seen anything to say if they did or didn’t. If there are serious concerns from cardinals, bishops, priest, deacons, and laity and no clarification is forth coming, then should it simply be ignored? Most clergy that I personally know simply are reverting to the clear teaching in FC, but there are some indications that the Holy Father is not happy with that approach. Without clarification most of us are left to read between the lines.

Many people say that nothing has changed. In fact a few Bishops have reportedly been chided for not making changes. So if nothing has really changed then answering the dubia should not be a huge deal. Just as the Holy Father immediately confirmed the teaching of St JPII on female priests, it would seem that he would have simply pointed to FC if the prohibition on receiving the Eucharist while remarried and living as husband and wife (what is noted as more uxorio in the dubia) still stands. If there is a change that alters St john Paul II’s teaching in Familiaris Consortio then it does seem important to be clear on how it changes.

I am not talking about the specifics of pastoral accompaniment, but rather how this impacts doctrine around the sacraments and the grave sin of adultery. Working in the area of adult catechisis and marriage and family life in particular this is very important issue for me to understand. In the past it was a fairly simple question when dealing with people on divorce and remarriage. We had very clear teachings for John Paul the Great, but now that situation is infinitely more murky. I would have always encouraged them to talk to a priest, but could lay out the basic teachings. Now? Can I even reliably refer to Familiaris Consortio or do I simply say “well we used to teach this, but now it’s completely at Father’s discretion”? This goes way beyond simply saying it’s an issue for the clergy unless only the clergy are going to staff RCIA and Marriage and family life offices.

 

[josh987654321]

.

Father, with respect, can you please help me to understand this as anything but a contradiction?

1. We, as Catholics, are commemorating jointly with the Lutherans the 500th anniversary of the Reformation. Joint services of common prayer and other commemorations will be occurring in dioceses throughout the world over the course of the next years.

How do the Lutherans feel about the reformation? about the 500th anniversary of the reformation? so what are we to take from Catholics (Including our Holy Father) commemorating this with Lutherans? What of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?

Thank you

God Bless You

Josh

 

[Convert_in_99]

Ah but there is no need to not include me.

Canon Law provides clarity on matters of this sort.

• The first see is judged by no one.

Thus no human person at all, and no earthly power, may judge the Bishop of Rome, the Vicar of Christ. As the canon clearly says, too: By virtue of his office he possesses supreme, full, immediate, and universal ordinary power in the Church, which he is always able to exercise freely.

• Only the Pope may judge a Cardinal.

Thus there is absolutely no place for any intervention on my part – or the part of anyone else – to offer any critique of a Cardinal. I certainly accept that these four Cardinals are in need of remedial help. I have every confidence that their need for help will, ultimately, be dealt with.

His Holiness, I am also quite certain, will deal with those who compose his College of Cardinals as it pleases him and he sees fit. They owe him obedience, which they pledged in the moment he was elected…a promise Pope Benedict made in anticipation of the conclave and before he departed the Vatican for Castel Gandolfo.

There is, moreover, now in place the new Cardinal Prefect of the new dicastery with competence for the Laity, Family, and Life; he will guide the implementation of pastoral accompaniment in the aftermath of the last two synods and the post synodal apostolic exhortation…and he has demonstrated he quite understands it.

As for the statements of various bishops…they ultimately also owe obedience and submission to the Vicar of Christ, which they were obliged to promise before they received episcopal ordination. There is nothing for one who is not a bishop to give voice to in their regard…at all.

Beyond that, I have nothing to say about these more recent posts, except this: I am a priest and I am a theologian. I follow unreservedly the Successor of Saint Peter. Not only do I not have even the slightest word of criticism about His Holiness, I have rather words of very great praise for Pope Francis. Not only is there nothing that causes me concern, I have been happy to collaborate in what has resulted from the synods and from the exhortation in every way that I have been asked.

I am always mindful of the words of Pope Saint John Paul II in the face of what was shameless and reprehensible rebellion against the Successor of Peter in 1988. He wrote:
It is impossible to remain faithful to the Tradition while breaking the ecclesial bond with him to whom, in the person of the Apostle Peter, Christ himself entrusted the ministry of unity in his Church.
I have taken that as my measure: faithfulness to God, to Tradition and to the Church is co-extant with a total oneness of mind and heart with the Pope and a complete docility to him as he exercises the Petrine ministry.

Rather than focus, or even have any real interest, on four Cardinals, emeriti from their respective previous offices, who submitted, as a personal petition, dubia to which the Pope made the response he did, I have focused rather on the Cardinals who have contributed positively to the implementation of various aspects of pastoral care for people who are in need of pastoral care; their statements regarding the implementation of Amoris Laetitia I have found of much more utility as well as of much more interest.

Love the Saint JPII quote. I had no idea he also had much criticism.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Love the Saint JPII quote. I had no idea he also had much criticism.

Criticism and much much worse.

He had to contend with a schismatic act perpetrated against him, as Head of the College of Bishops, and therefore against the Church. It was quite sad. This was years before you were received into full communion. I remember it as if it were yesterday.

 

[Chipper]

Criticism and much much worse.

He had to contend with a schismatic act perpetrated against him, as Head of the College of Bishops, and therefore against the Church. It was quite sad. This was years before you were received into full communion. I remember it as if it were yesterday.

So father thank you again for your response.

So when Father Antonio Spadaro (spokesman for the pope) called “Cardinal Burke” a “wittless worm” he then violated canon law - yes?

 

[Convert_in_99]

Criticism and much much worse.

He had to contend with a schismatic act perpetrated against him, as Head of the College of Bishops, and therefore against the Church. It was quite sad. This was years before you were received into full communion. I remember it as if it were yesterday.

Oh my!

Well I hope this “to do” doesn’t result in the same!

I fear another schismatic split with as upset as people are. If they take a Cardinal with them then we are REALLY in trouble.

 

[KSU]

I didn’t realize the document was publicized. I’ve never heard of it until all the hype.

The hype and division has been going on for years, starting in earnest with A.L. 's parent-- the two-part Synod on the Family. Battle lines were drawn in 2014 among the world’s prelates concerning the issue of whether Communion could/would be allowed for couples in irregular “marriages”, including same sex unions.

Pope Francis, after some suspense, shot down the Communion for “committed gay couples” proposal, but **seems ** to have left open the subject matter of this thread (and years of other threads on the same matter).

That, my friend, is why there are so many frayed nerves around here and why the moderator has been kept busy.

 

[josh987654321]

Were those two quotes in AL? I haven’t searched for them yet, but I plan to see if they are in there and try to read it in context to see if that may help.

p.s. Your not dumb, nor a failure in life.

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[Chipper]

You know what, I don’t think anyone is ignoring you. I think a lot of us are just shattered and we don’t want to get accused of passing judgement on a Pope.

However you are in a lot of company, with those of us who are just trying to figure out what is going on here. Not just lay people, but top theologians and cardinals and bishops.

What I am hoping for, is patience to pay off that maybe in a little more time either explanations will be given or corrections made.

 

[fin]

I noticed this too. I’ve been waiting for responses to your questions too, but they’re ignored. Wonder why? Thank you for being a good and faithful Catholic, (name removed by moderator). You’re a good role model for sticking up to Church teachings.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

So father thank you again for your response.

So when Father Antonio Spadaro (spokesman for the pope) called “Cardinal Burke” a “wittless worm” he then violated canon law - yes?

The Reverend Father Spadaro is the director of La Civiltà Cattolica…not the Pope’s spokesman. That is a position held by someone else.

As for the rest of your post, I leave that for a moderator.

 

[josh987654321]

You can use ‘Ctrl+F’ and search for key words or phrases in the pdf document, which is what I will try first, and then I will search the pages that Chipper gave in their previous post.

I hope this has helped

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Father, with respect, can you please help me to understand this as anything but a contradiction?

You posted a box, devoid of text, except for a period.

How do the Lutherans feel about the reformation? about the 500th anniversary of the reformation? so what are we to take from Catholics (Including our Holy Father) commemorating this with Lutherans? What of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?

The answer, well stated, may be found with PCPCU, which I have linked to innumerable times in this forum, on this very issue, and now across more than six months.

 

[pnewton]

The obsessive compulsive and the Baptist in me has to finish this (and it reveals what this verse is really about)

No: “For the wages of sin is death…” Romans, 6:23

… but the gift of God is eternal life.

People, if you you have never read an epistle, like Romans through, you should. It is time well spent. You would be amazed at how many quotes aren’t what you think.

 

[pnewton]

There is an indirect dialog and it is being discussed feverishly in my mens theology discussion group…I assure you there is a very silent majority of Catholics out there and murmurings are beginning to get a bit louder.

This could be a case of confirmation bias, as may be much of the criticism we hear, the squeaky wheel and all.