The true meaning of Amoris Laetitia?

[e_c]

I have some questions for Blue.

1. What exactly is a “loyal dissenting bishop”?
2. How can there be a “marital debt” when there is no marriage?
3. What gives a person the authority to override the decision of a tribunal in favor of a previous union?
4. Why would a person be justified in choosing to have relations with a non-spouse “for the kids” or to soothe concupiscence?

 

[Blue_Horizon]

I have some questions for Blue.

1. What exactly is a “loyal dissenting bishop”?
2. How can there be a “marital debt” when there is no marriage?
3. What gives a person the authority to override the decision of a tribunal in favor of a previous union?
4. Why would a person be justified in choosing to have relations with a non-spouse “for the kids” or to soothe concupiscence?

There is a well known developmental issue discoverable by pointing a finger. Some children keep looking at the finger instead of the thing pointed to.

If you cannot work out what is meant by the euphemism “marital debt” then it is also likely you would not be able to find an aircraft blackbox at a crash site either for it is in fact orange.

So then what chance have you of navigating an issue as adult complex as AL .

 

[e_c]

There is a well known developmental issue discoverable by pointing a finger. Some children keep looking at the finger instead of the thing pointed to.

If you cannot work out what is meant by the euphemism “marital debt” then it is also likely you would not be able to find an aircraft blackbox at a crash site either for it is in fact orange.

So then what chance have you of navigating an issue as adult complex as AL .

Blue,

It is much more than a euphemism… It denotes something very specific in moral theology. You beg the question by calling some instance of relations “paying the marital debt,” because that phrase assumes that there is actually a marriage between those two people and therefore certain rights over each other’s bodies. There is no marital debt to someone who is not your spouse. (A similar, albeit less pernicious, error occurs when people use “conjugal” incorrectly.)

I am finding your evasion and belittling quite telling.

 

[e_c]

Further, Blue, I want to make it clear that being pope or bishop or priest does not equate with being a good theologian or even giving a hoot about theology. This pontiff has an open disdain for academics, as evidenced not only by the shutting down of real discussion on Amoris (etc.) but also by his active discouragement of his men to go on to advanced studies when he was a novice master. To say that he is an “Einstein or Fermi” of theology (or canon law) is absurd… Look, for example, at the document Misericordia et Misera, and see if there is a proper treatment of the sin of abortion and the crime of abortion… It’s as if he (and/or his ghost writers) didn’t even know that priests with faculties to give absolution could already absolve the sin! They thought there are still reserved sins! What else explains it?

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Blue,

It is much more than a euphemism… It denotes something very specific in moral theology. You beg the question by calling some instance of relations “paying the marital debt,” because that phrase assumes that there is actually a marriage between those two people and therefore certain rights over each other’s bodies. There is no marital debt to someone who is not your spouse. (A similar, albeit less pernicious, error occurs when people use “conjugal” incorrectly.)

I am finding your evasion and belittling quite telling.

I find your “confusion” quite telling, just like the naysaying Cardinals.

Irregulars are not as a whole in “pretend marriages”. Nor are you able to see things through the eyes of the likely non Catholic partner who is also vowed, and sincerely so.
To seriously entertain the notion, as you do, indicates a moral immaturity that only the Holy Spirit can assist you with…not a CAF discussion no matter how informed or intelligent.

It is clear which side AL and Pope Francis is on.
If you cannot see it for yourself yet then walk with him in faith.

If you cannot accept the possibility your own Pope is wiser, better theologically educated, better pastorally experienced and morally more enlightened than yourself … quite apart from being Gods chosen … then only time and the HS can change you on this point.

God bless.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Further, Blue, I want to make it clear that being pope or bishop or priest does not equate with being a good theologian or even giving a hoot about theology. This pontiff has an open disdain for academics, as evidenced not only by the shutting down of real discussion on Amoris (etc.) but also by his active discouragement of his men to go on to advanced studies when he was a novice master. To say that he is an “Einstein or Fermi” of theology (or canon law) is absurd… Look, for example, at the document Misericordia et Misera, and see if there is a proper treatment of the sin of abortion and the crime of abortion… It’s as if he (and/or his ghost writers) didn’t even know that priests with faculties to give absolution could already absolve the sin! They thought there are still reserved sins! What else explains it?

Having lived in a Dominican Priory (a house of studies and formation with Novices attached to a universirty) of 25 friars for 6+ years I understand exactly why he would have done above. The Church does not need more hothouse produced eyes on stalks academic clerics.
He is not an academic’s “academic”, but dont be fooled, he is more intelligent than most. As was Christ.

 

[1Lord1Faith]

Blue,

It is much more than a euphemism… It denotes something very specific in moral theology. You beg the question by calling some instance of relations “paying the marital debt,” because that phrase assumes that there is actually a marriage between those two people and therefore certain rights over each other’s bodies. There is no marital debt to someone who is not your spouse. (A similar, albeit less pernicious, error occurs when people use “conjugal” incorrectly.)

I am finding your evasion and belittling quite telling.

“quite telling” of what?

Anyway, for all the desire you have shown in wanting to contribute to a hashing out of AL, it’s ironic that you don’t see what Blue is pointing out about you. It leads me to believe that you’re not actually interested in AL so much as a bias that you have that needs to be expressed through attacking AL.

Furthermore, your projection of a “disdain for academia” onto Pope Francis also seems to come from some sort of bias. Pope Francis has no disdain for academia in general.

There will always be some people in the general population who think that the solutions to personal problems will be found in books or on paper of some sort. Academia also has people like this in it, every field of life does, but because of it’s nature academia may have more people like this than the general population does. Blue is trying to tell you that you may be one of these people. However, you are still young and may yet come to realize that experience is exponentially more valuable than paper.

AL is a simple document. The ones who rail against it are also the ones who “don’t get it”. Some really don’t understand, I’m not talking about them. I’m talking about the people who keep looking backwards because their understanding of an older piece of paper doesn’t match their understanding of this new piece of paper. All the while seemingly oblivious to the reason why anything is written down in the first place.

Some people, old and young, need to “get out of the office” more often so they can see/experience the subject of their work. Without doing so they become lifeless authors of lifeless work.

 

[e_c]

I find your “confusion” quite telling, just like the naysaying Cardinals.

Irregulars are not as a whole in “pretend marriages”. Nor are you able to see things through the eyes of the likely non Catholic partner who is also vowed, and sincerely so.
To seriously entertain the notion, as you do, indicates a moral immaturity that only the Holy Spirit can assist you with…not a CAF discussion no matter how informed or intelligent.

It is clear which side AL and Pope Francis is on.
If you cannot see it for yourself yet then walk with him in faith.

If you cannot accept the possibility your own Pope is wiser, better theologically educated, better pastorally experienced and morally more enlightened than yourself … quite apart from being Gods chosen … then only time and the HS can change you on this point.

God bless.

Au contraire… “Moses gave you that law because of the hardness of your hearts.”

Irregularity is essentially a non-marriage. We are not polygamists, so any attempt to marry while still married - even according to right and relevant jurisprudence (NB: different rules for those not bound by ecclesiastical law!) - is to attempt to enter into a polygamous union and relations therein are adulterous on the part of the divorced person.

It’s good that you lived with the friars for a while. I am curious which house (I am familiar with a good number in the US and Europe), but my point about the Holy Father stands. It is not necessary to be a genius like Ratzinger to be a good pope, but the crisis we are now in is indeed a product (at least in part) of haphazard theology and law.

Blue, you can dump on me all you want and claim I need to be “enlightened” or whatever. I happen to think that is very low and goes to show how bad your own arguments are. You have not answered any of my questions, and you will just continue to belittle me and claim the pope has an opinion and therefore anyone who disagrees is “immature” etc. Okay. Count me out. I will end with this… Perhaps the Church’s Tradition is wiser and more educated and experienced than any pope.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Au contraire… “Moses gave you that law because of the hardness of your hearts.”

Irregularity is essentially a non-marriage. We are not polygamists, so any attempt to marry while still married - even according to right and relevant jurisprudence (NB: different rules for those not bound by ecclesiastical law!) - is to attempt to enter into a polygamous union and relations therein are adulterous on the part of the divorced person.

It’s good that you lived with the friars for a while. I am curious which house (I am familiar with a good number in the US and Europe), but my point about the Holy Father stands. It is not necessary to be a genius like Ratzinger to be a good pope, but the crisis we are now in is indeed a product (at least in part) of haphazard theology and law.

Blue, you can dump on me all you want and claim I need to be “enlightened” or whatever. I happen to think that is very low and goes to show how bad your own arguments are. You have not answered any of my questions, and you will just continue to belittle me and claim the pope has an opinion and therefore anyone who disagrees is “immature” etc. Okay. Count me out. I will end with this… Perhaps the Church’s Tradition is wiser and more educated and experienced than any pope.

If you understood my drift you would realise that, like the 4-1=3 Cardinals, there is nothing I can say that will make sense to you given your current world view.
Its one of those self evident things, you either get it or you dont re your pretend marriages.

Its no more dumping than a child exclaiming the Emporer is wearing no clothes .
If you cannot understand why I dont agree with you just treat me as an idiot and move on.
I certainly am.

 

[Rau]

…Irregularity is essentially a non-marriage. We are not polygamists, so any attempt to marry while still married…

Begs the question though - what if the first marriage is putatively valid but is known (to the participants) to be invalid.

Certainly Church rules forbid another marriage absent a definitive Tribunal finding. Does God deem that also to be the standard?

 

[e_c]

“quite telling” of what?

Anyway, for all the desire you have shown in wanting to contribute to a hashing out of AL, it’s ironic that you don’t see what Blue is pointing out about you. It leads me to believe that you’re not actually interested in AL so much as a bias that you have that needs to be expressed through attacking AL.

Furthermore, your projection of a “disdain for academia” onto Pope Francis also seems to come from some sort of bias. Pope Francis has no disdain for academia in general.

There will always be some people in the general population who think that the solutions to personal problems will be found in books or on paper of some sort. Academia also has people like this in it, every field of life does, but because of it’s nature academia may have more people like this than the general population does. Blue is trying to tell you that you may be one of these people. However, you are still young and may yet come to realize that experience is exponentially more valuable than paper.

AL is a simple document. The ones who rail against it are also the ones who “don’t get it”. Some really don’t understand, I’m not talking about them. I’m talking about the people who keep looking backwards because their understanding of an older piece of paper doesn’t match their understanding of this new piece of paper. All the while seemingly oblivious to the reason why anything is written down in the first place.

Some people, old and young, need to “get out of the office” more often so they can see/experience the subject of their work. Without doing so they become lifeless authors of lifeless work.

It’s quite telling of an inability to defend the claims he has made.

I think the college of cardinals (where there are FAR more critics than just the three dubia cardinals, but those three just are less vulnerable, as they are without dioceses) and staggering litany of eminent clergy and academics have been “out of the office” plenty. They all understand that second unions can pose immense challenges for those who find themselves in them and feel stuck. But there is nothing to learn that would undo the constant teaching and practice of the Church on this point, which Abp. Fernandez claims AL was supposed to do… by an ambiguous footnote.

 

[e_c]

Begs the question though - what if the first marriage is putatively valid but is known (to the participants) to be invalid.

Certainly Church rules forbid another marriage absent a definitive Tribunal finding. Does God deem that also to be the standard?

Nobody is competent to judge his own case - though a person without the benefit of the use of a tribunal must (non-Catholics marrying non-Catholics). I used the word “polygamy” as a rhetorical example of what could be possible without the external judgement… There is a spouse in one’s mind, and another spouse in the mind of the law - a sort of multiplicity of spouses. If they think they are not married, then they can approach the appropriate tribunal. If they choose not to, then they can not marry. If the tribunal decides in favor of the union, then they are bound to obey (appeals notwithstanding).

If there is no possibility of approaching a tribunal, or one is without witnesses… Well, that is a much more fascinating topic, which I have said I would be interested in discussing in a fresh thread.

I think I will now take leave of this one. Let us pray and fast for the Holy Father.

Peace…

 

[PJM]

You are overthinking things, the point I made in the context of this discussion is much simpler.

The plain reading of “Thou shall not kill” is that soldiers are Killers.
The plain reading of “Thou shall not commit adultery” is that irregulars are Adulterers.

Yet the plain reading of the 5thC does not hold as you so astutely observe.

Therefore why are so many persons here chained to reading the 6thC as intrinsically literal - even when Pope Francis and others are clearly suggesting there can be cases of adultery where irregulars are not the Adulterers that God speaks of, just as there are killers who are not the Killers God speaks of .

Friend.

Thank you,

The answer to your question in a word is TRUTH.

Not event e Pope can redefine what Christ [GOD] has taught and instructed HIS CHURCH to teach.

As I indicated in a much eariler post of this string, I can provide VERY MANY Expert opinions that detail the deficiencies and contentions of AL.

A now deceased mentor of mine; Father John A. Hardon, taught this about TRUTH:

"TRUTH IS THE CONDITION OF GRACE, IT IS THE SOURCE OF GRACE, IT IS THE CHANEL OF GRACE,IT IS THE DIVINELY ORDAINED REQUIREMENT OF GRACE…

So when TRUTH is lacking, or altered we DO have a serious crisis to contend with.

Father Hardon was one of the most esteemed Theologians of the 20th Century.

GBY

Patrick

 

[PJM]

I have some questions for Blue.

1. What exactly is a “loyal dissenting bishop”?
2. How can there be a “marital debt” when there is no marriage?
3. What gives a person the authority to override the decision of a tribunal in favor of a previous union?
4. Why would a person be justified in choosing to have relations with a non-spouse “for the kids” or to soothe concupiscence?

EXCELLENT!

Looking forward to the reply to your Q’s

GBY

 

[Stat_Crux]

I haven’t been on these forums for a few months. The last time I was here, everyone was debating Amoris Laetita.

Now that I’m back, people are still debating Amoris Laetitia

What’s the position of the argument so far? Has any progress been made on either side? Clearly at some point there needs to be a resolution one way or the other.

 

[PJM]

There is a well known developmental issue discoverable by pointing a finger. Some children keep looking at the finger instead of the thing pointed to.

If you cannot work out what is meant by the euphemism “marital debt” then it is also likely you would not be able to find an aircraft blackbox at a crash site either for it is in fact orange.

So then what chance have you of navigating an issue as adult complex as AL .

WOW

A subjective reply instead of real answers to POST #101 legitimize questions… I wonder WHY:shrug:

GBY

 

[PJM]

Indeed, but nobody said that has only one meaning.
She may well be referring to the disunity of those who oppose Christ’s rock on this matter to the point of Schism.

Blue, you in wishful thinking land here…

GBY

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Thank you,

The answer to your question in a word is TRUTH.

Not event e Pope can redefine what Christ [GOD] has taught and instructed HIS CHURCH to teach.

As I indicated in a much eariler post of this string, I can provide VERY MANY Expert opinions that detail the deficiencies and contentions of AL.

A now deceased mentor of mine; Father John A. Hardon, taught this about TRUTH:

"TRUTH IS THE CONDITION OF GRACE, IT IS THE SOURCE OF GRACE, IT IS THE CHANEL OF GRACE,IT IS THE DIVINELY ORDAINED REQUIREMENT OF GRACE…

So when TRUTH is lacking, or altered we DO have a serious crisis to contend with.

Father Hardon was one of the most esteemed Theologians of the 20th Century.

GBY

Patrick

PJM I think you have issues and your inability to respond to rational explanation with equally sequitorial rationality is pretty much what the ancient Greeks referred to as “idio-tes”. Those caught up only with their own view and incapable of public converse. The opposite of which are the “poli-tes”, those who can. You are sincere but unfortunately it seems not well capable in the skills of ancient politics.
God bless, I wont be engaging you further for that reason.

 

[MaryT777]

I haven’t been on these forums for a few months. The last time I was here, everyone was debating Amoris Laetita.

Now that I’m back, people are still debating Amoris Laetitia

What’s the position of the argument so far? Has any progress been made on either side? Clearly at some point there needs to be a resolution one way or the other.

Yes I agree with you some resolution must be made. No it has not been made here yet. However, there are some who know more than the Pope on this forum and believe the thoughts in AL are wrong.

One has indicated he has a disdain for priests more academically inclined. Isn’t it sad the Holy Spirit inspired that Pope Francis be pope albeit he is not “academically inclined” as much.

Quite frankly we seem to be short on priests “in the trenches” doing the work of Christ which included Mercy, Forgiveness and a thought that the Pope is the successor of Peter and sits at the head of the Church.

I always wonder what advanced degrees people on here disagreeing with AL have that make them feel more academic than the Pope (or pastor training, experience and knowledge to mention a few others.)

 

[Rau]

cruxnow.com/vatican/2017/08/21/papal-confidante-says-amoris-critics-locked-death-trap-logic/

This is one of the best commentaries on the Pope’s of exhortation I have read. AL represents a development of doctrine and the associated praxis. Here I think we see the Pope’s intentions very clearly.

Praise God for the gift of the Pope! May he be blessed by the Spirit with continued strength and courage!

And here is a contrary view:
crisismagazine.com/2017/fornicating-self-defense