Why Catholics uncomfortable with ‘Amoris’ aren’t ‘dissenters’

[3_Dog_Night]

Martin Luther would approve and agree with my sentiments? Yes, indeed, he probably would! And so would Pope Francis. If you recall, Pope Francis spent the 499th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation in Lund, Sweden - commemorating the anniversary of the Protestant Reformation. I don’t have to become a Protestant; I can remain in the Catholic Church and be Protestant – all with the blessing and accompaniment of the Pope himself.

My words are not helpful and/ or are over the top? Is that your judgment of me! Whatever happened to “Who am I to judge?” Actually, as I see it, anything traditional and Catholic is to be judged – you know, the folks that breed like rabbits and cling to and pray their rosary, And no matter what else you do, don’t you dare call adultery “adultery”. Because if you do, you are being rigid and judgmental, and it is not merciful to urge people to repentance.

 

[RPRPsych]

Martin Luther would approve and agree with my sentiments? Yes, indeed, he probably would! And so would Pope Francis. If you recall, Pope Francis spent the 499th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation in Lund, Sweden - commemorating the anniversary of the Protestant Reformation. I don’t have to become a Protestant; I can remain in the Catholic Church and be Protestant – all with the blessing and accompaniment of the Pope himself.

My words are not helpful and/ or are over the top? Is that your judgment of me! Whatever happened to “Who am I to judge?” Actually, as I see it, anything traditional and Catholic is to be judged – you know, the folks that breed like rabbits and cling to and pray their rosary, And no matter what else you do, don’t you dare call adultery “adultery”. Because if you do, you are being rigid and judgmental, and it is not merciful to urge people to repentance.

Oh my, does the little neo-Montanist cuck feel oppressed?

 

[Wandile]

"The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their confreres…churches and altars sacked; the Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord.

“The demon will be especially implacable against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will be no longer pardon for them.”

Our Lady of Akita
October 13, 1973

ewtn.com/library/mary/akita.htm

Amen

 

[1neophyte]

Martin Luther would approve and agree with my sentiments? Yes, indeed, he probably would! And so would Pope Francis. If you recall, Pope Francis spent the 499th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation in Lund, Sweden - commemorating the anniversary of the Protestant Reformation. I don’t have to become a Protestant; I can remain in the Catholic Church and be Protestant – all with the blessing and accompaniment of the Pope himself.

My words are not helpful and/ or are over the top? Is that your judgment of me! Whatever happened to “Who am I to judge?” Actually, as I see it, anything traditional and Catholic is to be judged – you know, the folks that breed like rabbits and cling to and pray their rosary, And no matter what else you do, don’t you dare call adultery “adultery”. Because if you do, you are being rigid and judgmental, and it is not merciful to urge people to repentance.

I am impressed that you limited yourself to two exclamation points in this post. Well done!

 

[Robert_Bay]

**MODERATOR NOTE
**
Please charitably discuss the issues, not other members

 

[RPRPsych]

I am impressed that you limited yourself to two exclamation points in this post. Well done!

I suggest that our furry friend read St. Augustine on the topic of schism.

He makes Gerry Matatics look like Rembert Weakland.

As for the Montanist crack, it’s worth considering the Montanist heresy: “holier than the corrupt establishment”, and relying on private revelations from crackpot women “prophets”. Fast forward to the current day, and that’s what blog warriors like 3 Furry Plushie are subscribing to. It’s sad, really. I’m going to stop with my Vox Day impersonation for now, since the moderators said so, but I think he’s on a very dangerous road.

 

[Wampa]

I was hesitant to post another AL article, since the battelines here at CAF are so well-formed and I don’t want to prompt another 100 posts by the same folks on each side making the same arguments.

Well, we made it about 1/3 of a page before the thread devolved. I tried! Thanks to the early participants. We might as well let this thread die now unless people can, as the moderator said, refrain from attacking each other and actually talk about the content of the thread.

 

[Pulvis]

Well, we made it about 1/3 of a page before the thread devolved. I tried! Thanks to the early participants. We might as well let this thread die now unless people can, as the moderator said, refrain from attacking each other and actually talk about the content of the thread.

 

[Thomas_White]

I have always said that Catholics have a right to speak up about things they disagree with, and that Catholics should not be shy about exploring issues, thinking and talking about discipline and doctrine. Anyone who has seen my posts here over the years knows I am not shy about doing the same.

But I do take exception with those that claim the Pope lacks authority to teach on this or other issues, or those that start throwing around terms like heretic, satanic, demon influenced, and so forth. (Yes, posters here have said each of those things.) Most Catholics understand that they must simultaneously accept that the Church has the authority to control its own teaching, while also discussing those things that they find troubling or confusing in a rational way. We sometimes struggle with that here at CAF. (Although I find it is not hard to do with Catholics in real life.)

All that said, for someone that can’t get comfortable with a given teaching, and therefore disagrees with it, is in dissent. If you disagree with the Church’s teachings, seems like you are dissenting. I don’t find that necessarily pejorative or damning. Most Catholics dissent on one thing or another, and sometimes the dissenters turn out to be right. But maybe there is some nuance to “dissenter” that I am missing here.

Perhaps the difficulty is reflected in the title of the OP: ‘Why Catholics uncomfortable with ‘Amoris’ aren’t ‘dissenters’.’ What does it mean that a person is uncomfortable about something but not a ‘dissenter’? Here is the conclusion of the article:

"Most Catholics uncomfortable with Amoris Latitia are saddened and unsettled with the mere idea of being at odds with the Church hierarchy on any matter, let alone one so consequential. Pope Francis is their Holy Father, the Vicar of Christ–most would recoil at the notion of being viewed as “dissenters”.

To be uncomfortable with something means to be in disagreement with or to at least have doubts about it. To this extent, the conclusion of the article seems a rationalization, a wishing away of what is real. In a way, the article introduces the difficulty by using the word “dissent” in the first place, and, really, ends up not informing us of much we don’t already know: Not every Catholic embraces AL.

 

[pnewton]

Well, we made it about 1/3 of a page before the thread devolved. I tried! Thanks to the early participants. We might as well let this thread die now unless people can, as the moderator said, refrain from attacking each other and actually talk about the content of the thread.

I wish we could have a thread without about half a dozen posters that keep getting threads locked, about half on each side of the debate. Oh well.

“Dissenter” is a noun, and a loaded worded, as much as any rhetoric about spitting on the Eucharist. Dissenting (verb) from one teaching at one time, either because of lack of understanding, lack of agreement or simply insufficient time to process the point does not make one a dissenter, as the word is commonly used. Thus it becomes an unnecessary insult. The point of this thread isn’t what one’s position, but whether one can discuss a difficult topic without resorting to labeling sides.

 

[Thomas_White]

I wish we could have a thread without about half a dozen posters that keep getting threads locked, about half on each side of the debate. Oh well.

“Dissenter” is a noun, and a loaded worded, as much as any rhetoric about spitting on the Eucharist. Dissenting (verb) from one teaching at one time, either because of lack of understanding, lack of agreement or simply insufficient time to process the point does not make one a dissenter, as the word is commonly used. Thus it becomes an unnecessary insult. The point of this thread isn’t what one’s position, but whether one can discuss a difficult topic without resorting to labeling sides.

Agreed. The word “dissenter” is a loaded term with connotations, and “dissent” is not really a benign word either. We could say many have reservations, questions or even doubts about AL. A major point of the article is that many would rather not be cast as “dissenters” with respect to the pope. I for one (of many), see difficulties in reconciling what I believe AL means with traditional Church teaching, and no, I do not consider this “dissent”. But what AL means no longer seems in much doubt, and I think we must go forward from there by trying to come to terms with it.

 

[JimG]

Many bishops have interpreted Amoris Laetitia as being in accord with the constant teaching of the Church which preceded it, specifically with respect to the divorced and remarried being unable to receive the Eucharist. Many have published guidelines to their diocese explaining it in just that way: Nothing has changed. Other bishops have issued documents explaining AL as a major change in discipline at the least.

Four Cardinals have asked for specific papal clarification, which does not seem to be forthcoming. Academics have also asked for clarification.

That’s why I say it is not possible to dissent from a document that can be taken in two contradictory ways, until the meaning is clarified.

 

[Randolph]

Many bishops have interpreted Amoris Laetitia as being in accord with the constant teaching of the Church which preceded it, specifically with respect to the divorced and remarried being unable to receive the Eucharist. Many have published guidelines to their diocese explaining it in just that way: Nothing has changed. Other bishops have issued documents explaining AL as a major change in discipline at the least.

Four Cardinals have asked for specific papal clarification, which does not seem to be forthcoming. Academics have also asked for clarification.

That’s why I say it is not possible to dissent from a document that can be taken in two contradictory ways, until the meaning is clarified.

JimG. You summed it up well. Now, either Pope Francis will clarify it, or his successors will. Until then, talks of confusion continue…

 

[James248]

Martin Luther would approve and agree with my sentiments? Yes, indeed, he probably would! And so would Pope Francis. If you recall, Pope Francis spent the 499th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation in Lund, Sweden - commemorating the anniversary of the Protestant Reformation. I don’t have to become a Protestant; I can remain in the Catholic Church and be Protestant – all with the blessing and accompaniment of the Pope himself.

My words are not helpful and/ or are over the top? Is that your judgment of me! Whatever happened to “Who am I to judge?” Actually, as I see it, anything traditional and Catholic is to be judged – you know, the folks that breed like rabbits and cling to and pray their rosary, And no matter what else you do, don’t you dare call adultery “adultery”. Because if you do, you are being rigid and judgmental, and it is not merciful to urge people to repentance.

Do you know that you are saying you can be in schism with Mother Church???

 

[3_Dog_Night]

James248 Perhaps you are not aware of the Pope’s visit to Lund, Sweden on October 31, 2106 in commemoration of the 499th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation.

I (3 Dog Night) did not go to Lund, Sweden on the 499th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation to stand side by side with a Lutheran bishop (a woman minister who is openly lesbian) and exclaim and applaud the contributions that Father (and heretic) Martin Luther made to the gospel. The person who did that was Pope Francis. Apparently this is acceptable Catholic behavior in the furtherance of ecumenicism as modeled by none other than the pope himself. But who am I to judge? Schism? There is no such thing as schism if we are all Protestant now.

 

[Robert_Bay]

MODERATOR NOTICE

All posts are to be charitable, to everyone, even Catholic clergay

 

[1neophyte]

MODERATOR NOTICE

All posts are to be charitable, to everyone, even Catholic clergay

You keep saying that, but you continue to let 3 Dog Night spout his bile.

 

[Wampa]

Moderator: as the thread starter, I am 100% fine with you locking this thread, if you choose to do so. I see few possible benefits in letting it continue. Our uncharitable posters on both sides of this issue are clearly unable to restrain themselves even after warnings.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Moderator: as the thread starter, I am 100% fine with you locking this thread, if you choose to do so. I see few possible benefits in letting it continue. Our uncharitable posters on both sides of this issue are clearly unable to restrain themselves even after warnings.

Dear Moderator,
Perhaps we could simply rename the poorly named thread to start with.

I suggest “Why some Catholics validly have reservations about AL?”

Any other suggestions…

 

[Wampa]

Per forum rules, I named the thread with the exact title of the article. I even acknowledged in my first post that I didn’t think the title fully encapsulated the gist of the article.