Posted on 03/14/2018 5:02:35 PM PDT by ebb tide
Cardinal Walter Kasper, whose theology appears to be the chief inspiration for Pope Francis’ doctrine on giving Holy Communion to people living in states of adultery in second marriages, now appears to be claiming that homosexual unions contain “elements” of Christian marriage and are even “analogous” to it in a way that is similar to the relationship between the Catholic Church and non-Catholic Christian communities.
Moreover, the cardinal is attributing his claims to Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, despite the fact that the document explicitly contradicts him.
“The pope does not leave room for doubt over the fact that civil marriages, de facto unions, new marriages following a divorce (Amoris Laetitia 291) and unions between homosexual persons (Amoris Laetitia 250s.) do not correspond to the Christian conception of marriage,” writes Kasper in a recently-released book on Amoris Laetitia.
“He says, however, that some of these partners can realize in a partial and analogous way some elements in Christian marriage (Amoris Laetitia 292),” continues Kasper.
Kasper compares such relationships with the relationship between the Catholic Church and non-Catholic Christian groups, whom Vatican II says contain “elements of sanctification and truth” of the Church.
“Just as outside the Catholic Church there are elements of the true Church, in the above-mentioned unions there can be elements present of Christian marriage, although they do not completely fulfill, or do not yet completely fulfill, the ideal,” adds Kasper.
The statements appear in Kasper’s new booklet, "The Message of Amoris Laetitia: A Fraternal Discussion," which was recently published simultaneously in German and Italian.
In the same work, Kasper also insinuates that Amoris Laetitia opens the way to permit the use of contraception, a practice that is universally condemned in the Scriptures, Church Fathers, and the Papal Magisterium, most recently by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II.
Kasper notes that in Amoris Laetitia, the Pope only “encourages the use of the method of observing the cycles of natural fertility,” and “does not say anything about other methods of family planning and avoids all casuistic definitions.” In the context with the book’s passages on communion for those who commit adultery in second “marriages,” which use similar language, Kasper appears to be claiming that the pope is allowing for exceptions to the Church’s condemnation of artificial birth control.
Kasper’s words regarding homosexual unions appear to directly contradict not only the doctrines of John Paul II but even Amoris Laetitia, the document he purports to explain.
Under the papacy of John Paul II and the administration of Cardinal Josef Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI), the Holy See’s Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith expressly repudiated the idea that homosexual unions can be “analogous” to marriage. The document was issued in 2003 and received the approval of John Paul II.
“There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family,” the Congregation declared. “Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against the natural moral law. Homosexual acts close the sexual act to the gift of life.’ They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.”
The paragraphs in Amoris Laetitia cited by Kasper to justify treating homosexual unions as “analogous” to marriage contain no clear reference to homosexual unions but simply refer to the “constructive elements in those situations which do not yet or no longer correspond to her teaching on marriage.”
However, Amoris Laetitia states in paragraph 251, “In discussing the dignity and mission of the family, the Synod Fathers observed that, ‘as for proposals to place unions between homosexual persons on the same level as marriage, there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family.’” Francis and the Synod Fathers are quoting the same 2003 document of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith mentioned above.
Cardinal Kasper’s apparent desire to legitimize homosexual unions reflects the thinking of several influential bishops in the German hierarchy.
The Vice President of the German Episcopal Conference, Bishop Franz-Josef Bode, recently has said homosexual unions include “positive and good” aspects and has proposed blessings for them. He made similar comments in 2015.
Cardinal Reinhard Marx, a member of the Pope’s Council of Cardinal Advisers, apparently endorsed the possibility of blessing homosexual unions earlier this year, and then appeared to backtrack after heavy criticism, claiming that he only wanted to give such couples “spiritual encouragement.”
In June 2015, Bishop Heiner Koch of Dresden-Meissen (now Archbishop of Berlin), was quoted by the German Catholic newspaper Die Tagespost as saying, “Any bond that strengthens and holds people is in my eyes good; that applies also to same-sex relationships.”
The German bishops’ website, Katholisch.de, published an article in 2015 defending the notion of blessing homosexual unions, and blasting German Bishop Stefan Oster, who oversees the diocese of Passau, for defending the traditional moral teaching of the Church on sexuality.
Cardinal Kasper himself publicly endorsed Ireland’s creation of the institution of homosexual “marriage” in 2015, saying: “A democratic state has the duty to respect the will of the people; and it seems clear that, if the majority of the people wants such homosexual unions, the state has a duty to recognize such rights.”
However, Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, a German and former prefect of the Holy See’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, condemned such blessings in February, as have some other German and Austrian bishops.
“If a priest blesses a homosexual couple, then this is an atrocity at a holy site, namely, to approve of something that God does not approve of,” said Müller.
In announcing the publication of the book, Kasper complained that people are using the word “heresy” to describe the teaching that Holy Communion can be given to people in habitual states of adultery, which seems to be taught by Pope Francis in his apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia.
“There is a very bitter debate (about the Pope’s teaching), way too strong, with accusations of heresy,” Kasper said in a recent interview with Vatican News, the Holy See’s official news service, regarding "The Message of Amoris Laetitia."
In his book, Kasper protests against those theologians who have accused Francis of heresy, writing in a footnote, “Who, other than the Magisterium has the right to make an accusation of that type? Doesn’t the principle still hold that until one is legitimately condemned he must be considered to be within the orthodox church?”
He also claimed in interviews that Amoris Laetitia is easy to understand.
“This document’s language is so clear that any Christian can understand it. It is not high theology incomprehensible to people,” Kasper said. “The People of God are very content and happy with this document because it gives space to freedom, but it also interprets the substance of the Christian message in an understandable language. So, the People of God understand! The Pope has an optimal connection with the People of God.”
Why do you not attack the Lutheran church(s) as you do the Catholic Church?
So do you believe a person who follows Luther’s command to, “Be a sinner and sin boldly” leads a “holy life”?
***
Your unrepentant sin of hatred is leading you right into Hell, my man. That’s a violation of the 5th Commandment.
Violating the 8th Commandment against false witness is also a mortal sin.
Why do you not attack the Lutheran church(s) as you do the Catholic Church?
Lutherans don't post incessantly on these threads like Roman Catholics.
Now, go get that help.
That's because Catholics are so conditioned to follow a human leader that they cannot wrap their minds around the fact that others don't.
What also escapes them completely, is that the person can and will lead a holy, righteous life without the benefit of external motivation, force, threats, or coercion.
It seems that they cannot fathom a person being free to be accountable to no one but God and still be willing and able to do what is right.
Why do you not attack the Lutheran church(s) as you do the Catholic Church?
***
Well gee, maybe it’s because the Catholic so-called church has spent many many years protecting priests who bugger kiddies, contradict the plain words of the Bible, and elected Francis as Pope.
Of all the attackers of the Catholics, ebb, you’re the one who hates Catholicism the most; you’re the one who rages and rants about how much you hate what Catholicism has become. You’re the one who posts thread after thread about how much you hate the Catholic church and it needs to change to become more like what YOU want.
And then you scream and curse us because, after posting six threads per day about how much you hate Catholicism, you hate us for refusing to be Catholic.
I don’t know about the rest of my friends, but quite frankly, if you and your fellow travelers stopped insulting us with half of your posts, we’d be happy to live and let live.
But because of your constant posting of falsehoods that you didn’t even write yourself but copy-pasted from Christian-bashing sources, and your refusal to engage with anything but rage when people protest your hatred, you bring all this on yourself.
I am glad, that at least when I was a Catholic, I was spared from having anything to do with Mormonism.
I am in California now. I hate California. 👎😖
And how do you go about receiving absolution for your own mortal sins?
I doubt you have ever read any of the writings of Martin Luther other than some out-of-context snippets RC apologists trot out to slander him.
***
Of course he doesn’t. I challenged him once to bring me just three quotes from Luther’s theological works and why he disagreed with them.
He refused.
And how do you go about receiving absolution for your own mortal sins?
***
Well, let’s see. Jesus himself has promised forgiveness, because Jesus is our High Priest who was an atoning sacrifice for the sins of all mankind, once for all, as the book of Hebrews says.
I hear about that forgiveness from pastors through Word and Sacrament, because the Lord has invested the church as a whole with the office of the keys, to proclaim forgiveness to repentant sinners and withhold forgiveness from the unrepentant. And because when I sin, I repent of it, Jesus has promised forgiveness. And so I get forgiveness, which is proclaimed to me by the pastor, who has received that responsibility from the Church as a whole.
I also got that forgiveness from my baptism, in which all my sins were washed away. I ALSO get that forgiveness from the Lord’s Supper, in which I receive the true Body and Blood of Jesus, given and shed for me for the forgiveness of sins, as Jesus himself said.
I certainly wouldn’t go to a priest who would tell me that I have to earn God’s unearned kindness by doing mindless repetition of prayers to a created being, nor would I go to an organization that elected ‘Bergoglio’ thinking that they’d be able to forgive me.
How do you think YOU earn forgiveness for your sins? If it’s anywhere but in the death and resurrection of Jesus, I think you’re setting yourself up for quite a shock.
I must have missed that challenge. But here you go, and remember you asked for it.
MARTIN LUTHER ON THE DIGNITY AND MAJESTY OF GOD
“I look upon God no better than a scoundrel” (ref. Weimar, Vol. 1, Pg. 487. Cf. Table Talk, No. 963).
“Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tell’s us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’ Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the women taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died.” (ref. Trishreden, Weimer Edition, Vol. 2, Pg. 107. – What a great blasphemy from a man who is regarded as “great reformer”!).
“I have greater confidence in my wife and my pupils than I have in Christ” (ref. Table Talk, 2397b).
“It does not matter how Christ behaved – what He taught is all that matters” (ref. Erlangen Vol. 29, Pg. 126).
Some (38) errors or heresies of Martin Luther
Care to rebut any of them?
What also escapes them completely, is that the person can and will lead a holy, righteous life without the benefit of external motivation, force, threats, or coercion.
***
St. Paul writes that we are saved by grace through faith, and not on account of works. He says this many times in many different ways, and he’s very, VERY emphatic on the fact that works do not save us.
Rather, St. Paul (who was taught by Jesus and exercises Jesus’s authority as an apostle) says that we are saved in order to do good works that God prepared for us.
This is why we are judged by our works, because only saving faith in Jesus can produce works that are truly righteous. And those without faith will be... well:
“Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’”
Because we have to look at the WHOLE of Scripture and not just some cherry-picked verses that we can twist to support our own preconceived notions.
I have no idea why many FR Catholics are so reluctant to engage in Scripture. I’m prepared to answer any Scriptural challenge put to me about salvation, faith, grace, and works. The Catholics I’ve seen around on the other hand either post random verses and then refuse to reply any more, or just start playing the race—excuse me, the ‘heretic’ card.
Care to rebut any of them?
***
I’ll rebut every one that you’ve posted, but only if you’ll promise to actually read my rebuttals instead of throwing your little whiny ebby tantrums.
You promise that?
Even sins you have committed after your baptism?
If so, I'll read your rebuttal.
I'll give you five years to prepare your response.
“I look upon God no better than a scoundrel” (ref. Weimar, Vol. 1, Pg. 487. Cf. Table Talk, No. 963).
***
Tell me when you’ve read the whole thing and I’ll move onto the next.
Your source (Peter Weiner, who is a Luther-hating fanatic much like you) contains a brutal mistranslation of the German, assuming a mistranslation at all because nothing of the sort actually appears.
Here’s a proper translation: “God is very foolish [or stupidest], for the most powerful enemy Satan opposes is a sick man that is like a shaken reed. It must irk the devil terribly that he, such a great, powerful and intelligent spirit should not be able to overcome or hurt man, such a lowly and weak creature, without God’s permission. Therefore, angry Satan throws fiery darts at us, to which the remedy is the shield of faith. This certainly often has been undertaken with me.”
The only time that Luther refers to God as a ‘scoundrel’ was when he was speaking about his debates with Calvinists. I quote:
“Do Not Brood About the Mysteries Connected with Election. A dispute about predestination should be avoided entirely. Staupitz said: if you want to dispute about predestination, begin with the wounds of Christ, and it will cease. But if you continue to debate about it, you will lose Christ, the Word, the sacraments, and everything. I forget everything about Christ and God when I come upon these thoughts and actually get to the point to imagining that God is a rogue. We must stay in the word, in which God is revealed to us and salvation is offered, if we believe him. But in thinking about predestination, we forget God. Then the laudate (praise) stops, and the blasphemate (blaspheme) begins. However, in Christ are hid all the treasures (Col. 2:3); outside Him all are locked up. Therefore, we should simply refuse to argue about election. (W-T 2, No. 2654a - SL 22, 832, No. 75).”
So in other words, a misquote, a misplaced quote, and a lie of omission on the part of your stupid, stupid cherry-picked sources of hate. Luther is speaking of God being a ‘scoundrel’ when one abandons Scripture to follow one’s own itching ears.
Considering that your very first attack was an outright and total lie from your source, I would think that you’d be ashamed for being taken in by such propaganda.
Will you rebut each and all thirty-eight of them?
***
I’m rebutting one at a time, and I expect you to read them before I move on. I’m not going to waste my evening preparing a work if the only response is ebb tide flinging his poo at me.
Once you’ve read the first one, how about you prove to me that you’ve read it with some civil discussion instead of your usual whiny ebby tantrums?
I have read your rebuttal and have rejected it.
One down, thirty-seven to go regarding Luther’s heresies. I promise, I’ll read your other rebuttals as you post them.
Even sins you have committed after your baptism?
***
ALL my sins, as the Bible says.
“8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits[a] of the world, and not according to Christ. 9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, 10 and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. 11 In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us ALL OUR TRESPASSES (emphasis mine), 14 by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. 15 He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.” (Colossians 2)
So again, the Catholics are contradicting Scripture and proving that they’re no church at all.
Do you believe what the Apostle Paul says or not?
I have read your rebuttal and have rejected it.
***
Prove you’ve read it, you Biblically-illiterate buffoon.
I’ll give you five years.
You still don't get it do you? Baptism is not what saves you....it's the faith in Christ.
Once you place your faith in Christ, all of your sins, past, present and future, are forgiven.
If baptism saves then the Roman Catholic would have to be rebaptized after each and ever sin they commit.
Ya'll would never get out of the water....that is, if ya'll even practice immersion.
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.