Posted on 08/30/2017 8:41:38 AM PDT by ebb tide
Amoris Laetitia’s condonation of situation ethics via “discernment” of “concrete situations” among those living in adulterous “second marriages” threatens “to destroy the entire moral teaching of the Church” as a matter of “pure logic,” to quote the renowned philosopher Josef Siefert. Now there are rumors — well-founded Roman rumors, which tend to be true — of a coming application of the same “discernment” model to the Church’s teaching on the intrinsic evil of contraception.
Siefert’s concern centers on paragraph 303 of Amoris Laetitia (AL), wherein the following astonishing proposition is put forth:
“Yet conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel. It can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God (Relatio Finalis 2015, 85) and come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal.”
As Siefert rightly queries: “If only one case of an intrinsically immoral act can be permitted and even willed by God, must this not apply to all acts considered ‘intrinsically wrong’? If it is true that God can want an adulterous couple to live in adultery, should then not also the commandment ‘Do not commit adultery!’ be reformulated: ‘If in your situation adultery is not the lesser evil, do not commit it! If it is, continue living it!’?”
From this proposition, Siefert continues, would it not follow that “also the other 9 commandments, Humanae Vitae, Evangelium Vitae, and all past and present or future Church documents, dogmas, or councils that teach the existence of intrinsically wrong acts, fall? Is it then not any more intrinsically wrong to use contraceptives and is not Humanae Vitae in error that states unambiguously that it can never happen that contraception in any situation is morally justified, let alone commanded by God?”
These concerns take on even greater urgency in view of Pope Francis’ conspicuous invocation of the papal primacy during Mass on August 27. Quoth Francis:
“Jesus wanted for his church a visible center of communion in Peter and in those who would succeed him in the same primatial responsibility, which from the origins [of the Church] have been identified in the bishops of Rome, the city where Peter and Paul gave the witness of blood….
“Jesus understood that thanks to the faith given by the Father, there is a solid foundation on which he can build his church. And so he says to Simon: ‘You are Peter — that is, a stone, a rock — and on this rock I will build my church.’”
Perfectly true, of course. But what does it mean in the context of this tumultuous pontificate? The message was not lost on the Jesuit magazine America, the ultra-progressive journal which has consistently featured and promoted what the world hails as “the Francis revolution.” America notes approvingly that “Though he [Francis] makes no direct reference to them, his words would appear to be a gentle but firm reminder especially to that tiny minority of cardinals, bishops, priests, religious and lay faithful, who are challenging his authority, especially over his post-synod exhortation on the family, ‘The Joy of Love.’”
Quite simply, prepare for the worst: an attempt to abuse papal authority to compel acceptance of that which is clearly contrary to the Faith — a demand that whatever Pope Francis says about contraception or any other matter of faith and morals must be accepted simply and only because he has said it and he is the Pope, even if he has contradicted all of his predecessors on the same matter. That is, an attempt to impose sheer papal positivism upon the Church without regard to objective truth.
That would be the last act in the drama now playing itself out in the Church, whose climax can only be that heavenly intervention promised by the Mother of God at Fatima. And so it is that our fear of the worst is mingled with confidence in Heaven’s ultimate resolution of this ongoing disaster, a kind of Hurricane Harvey in the Church.
Quite simply, prepare for the worst: an attempt to abuse papal authority to compel acceptance of that which is clearly contrary to the Faith — a demand that whatever Pope Francis says about contraception or any other matter of faith and morals must be accepted simply and only because he has said it and he is the Pope, even if he has contradicted all of his predecessors on the same matter. That is, an attempt to impose sheer papal positivism upon the Church without regard to objective truth.
So now maybe we traditional Catholics split off from the Vatican II church. Been waiting my whole life for this.
The article sounds like Pope Francis is wanting to expand the, heretofore, limited definition of the “papal infallibility.”
I agree.
What next?
Ideally, a lightning or meteor strike on the Vatican.
Well, the thing is that he can’t do it, and in fact, his silly attempt to invoke “magisterial authority” for a stupid, vague but threatening statement about liturgical changes shows exactly how little he understands about it. At first people were nervous, and now they’re laughing at him.
I’m much more worried about his stupid political stunts, like going to Myanmar to “support” the Rohingya, the Muslim minority that is causing many problems by attempting to spill over out of its area into the Buddhist rest of the country. There are virtually no Catholics in Myanmar, its new democratic government is very fragile right now, they are under attack from the Muslims - and Francis the Foolish announces that he’s going to fly in to rescue the Muslims from “persecution”...? The Catholic bishops of the country are very alarmed, btw, because they think that this will turn the Buddhists against the Catholic population.
I will keep practicing the Catholic Faith, search out good Bishops, and pray that God use these things to set the ship right.
As far as pronouncements from Francis, that will be sunject to discernment in the light of Tradition and Church Dogma.
He has not seen fit to make any solemn declarations that are coherent and binding on the whole Church, placing his babblings at a level below dicta, and not worthy of any special consideration.
Well put.
I’ve been preaching this here for months, as much as you all don’t want to hear it. The Papacy is essentially a dictatorship. The dissenters will be punished, then banished. Schism is all but inevitable.
**Well, the thing is that he can’t do it, and in fact, his silly attempt to invoke “magisterial authority” for a stupid, vague but threatening statement about liturgical changes shows exactly how little he understands about it. **
Ditto!
“The Papacy”isn’t a dictatorship, which is precisely why BXVI had so little effect on the Church, and JPII even less despite nearly 30 years in office.
Francis, on the other hand, is throwing aside the Curia, relying on his own flaky advisors, and proclaiming himself dictator not only of the Church but of the world (hence his trip to Burma (aka Myanmar) to defend the Muslims).
THe problem is that many Catholics had an exaggerated idea of papal power. But strangely enough, Francis’ misuse of it may doom him and correct the entire idea.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.