Julio Martinez, S.J.: Pope Francis “has introduced discernment in the concrete circumstances of marriage and family life."
Posted on 06/03/2022 3:05:22 PM PDT by ebb tide
Julio Martinez, S.J.: Pope Francis “has introduced discernment in the concrete circumstances of marriage and family life."
Amoris Laetitia, the apostolic exhortation published by Pope Francis in March 2016 after the two synods of bishops on the family, not only radically altered the church’s concrete pastoral approach to marriage and the family, it also opened new ways of doing moral theology in the 21st century, Julio Martinez, S.J., a Spanish priest and moral theologian, told America magazine in an exclusive interview. The more fully that post-synodal text is received by pastors, Father Martinez said, the ever-greater impact it will have on the worldwide Catholic Church.
“The reception of a document of the magisterium is generally not so easy, but in the case of Amoris Laetitia, we can say it is even more difficult than for other kinds of documents because of the delicate matters with which it deals,” said Father Martinez in his keynote address at “Moral Theology and Amoris Laetitia,” a four-day international conference held at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome from May 11 to 14. “That is one of the reasons for the conference.”
Father Martinez is a professor of moral theology at Comillas Pontifical University in Madrid—where he was the rector from 2012 to 2021—and a visiting professor on the same subject at the Gregorian University. He is a graduate of Weston School of Theology, an institution that merged with the Institute of Religious Education and Pastoral Ministry at Boston College in 2004 to form what is today the Boston College School of Theology and Ministry.
In his address, Father Martinez called on those engaged in moral theology to “start from the mystery of the incarnation; of the God who became human flesh in Jesus Christ,” he said. And to “put our best energies into a courageous theological thinking that is human and kenotic [self-emptying], that is in contact with reality and open to the risk of encounter with other rationalities, cultures, and disciplines.”
While he recognized “it is more comfortable and apparently safer to repeat the paths inherited from the past, ignoring the questions, contradictions, and searches of the present,” he said. “What good is all this if we are not able to transmit light and hope to the problems and sufferings that shake the men and women of our day?”
“Amoris Laetitia demands a changed epistemology and way of elaborating moral knowledge, and here the question of discernment arises,” Father Martinez said. “Discernment is a very important word in the Ignatian tradition.”
Father Martinez remarked that Pope Francis in publishing Amoris Laetitia has brought this central tenet in the spirituality of St. Ignatius Loyola to the practice of moral theology.
Although Pope Francis’ understanding of moral theology, as espoused in Evangelii Gaudium (2013) and later in Veritatis Gaudium (2017), is informed by his Jesuit spirituality, it is also firmly rooted in the developments of the discipline ushered by the Second Vatican Council, especially in Gaudium et Spes (1965), a seminal constitution of the council reflecting on the church in the modern world. We need to recover this approach, Father Martinez said, “without getting lost in the meanders of Veritatis Splendor,” the 1993 encyclical in which Pope John Paul II addresses the church’s moral teaching in light of the fundamental truths of Catholic doctrine.
I asked Father Martinez if this way of thinking was new. “It is practically new in terms of moral theology (at least in terms of the way it is starting to be implemented); it is not new to the spiritual life,” he said. “We can say that it is almost new in moral theology because the Second Vatican Council introduced the concept and the method in Gaudium et Spes.” But, “this was not much developed in subsequent papal teachings,” he said.
Pope Francis, on the other hand, “has introduced discernment in the concrete circumstances of marriage and family life to find what is the will of God in the here and now, for me, as a person who tries to follow Christ,” Father Martinez said. “To put the focus on discernment in order to find the good is a really new thing in moral theology.”
After the Second Vatican Council, “the magisterium [papal teachings] appeared not to have much of a problem with discernment being applied to social issues,” Father Martinez said. “It was practically the opposite reaction or response when it came to applying discernment in matters of personal morality.” But, for Father Martinez, “the moral life is incomplete without personal and pastoral discernment.”
In Humanae Vitae (1968), for example, Pope Paul VI made the practice of discernment very difficult in terms of personal morality,” Father Martinez said, adding that Pope John Paul II had done the same in Veritatis Splendor.” But in Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis has given theologians and pastors the task of “trying to see how to apply discernment in all fields of moral life,” he said. “He is asking everyone to do this, but in a special way pastors and theologians—and this is what this conference is all about.”
But why has there been such resistance to the use of discernment in personal moral matters and not in social matters? “This is a little more complex,” Father Martinez replied. “At first, there was not the same kind of resistance to social questions. But, eventually, resistance also emerged in social moral matters,” he said, citing two instances. First “when the American church in the 1980s implemented a method of participation through dialogues and encounters to deal with the questions relating to peace (1983) and economic justice (1986),” he said, “the Vatican considered this matter to be problematic at the time.” Second, he recalled, “John Paul II decided to issue Veritatis Splendor, to set order in the field of Catholic moral theology.
Still, he added, “in personal matters relating to the body, sexuality and bioethics; this is the field of morality that is more problematic, while in social matters it appears to be easier.”
“It is fundamental to untie the knots Veritatis Splendor made in Catholic morals,” Father Martinez said, careful not to apportion blame for this solely on the Polish pope. He said the knots had, in fact, already begun to be tied 25-years prior with the release of Humanae Vitae. Though in Gaudium et Spes, the council asked pastors and theologians “to discern and consider the circumstances when dealing with marriage and family life,” he said,“Humanae Vitae did not do so in an accurate way.”
Veritatis Splendor introduced “a very profound development in moral theology with the introduction of the concept we call intrinsic evil,” he said. “This is a controversial philosophical concept that brought serious difficulties for moral theology in the development of the path of dialogue and discernment; which is the way to put into action a mature and well-formed conscience.” Furthermore, Veritatis Splendor had a profound impact on the church, by insisting the role of the magisterium included “teaching morals in a very precise and very clear way,” he said. And although it gives importance to conscience, which is “the proximate norm of personal morality,” he said, quoting from the encyclical, “it ends by understanding conscience somewhat as an instance of the person who has to know what the magisterium says and to implement this in his or her life.”
“Conscience is a fundamental part of morality. Indeed, you cannot eliminate conscience,” Father Martinez said. But Veritatis Splendor, he added, “very much fears what is called ‘creative conscience,’” and insists that “conscience cannot be creative. It has to somehow be obedient to the rules and the norms of the magisterium, and especially the magisterium of the pope, whose role it is to recognize and formulate the norms so the faithful can know and follow them.”
Father Martinez characterized this move as “a hypertrophy [an excessive development] of the magisterium in the field of moral theology, that took place during the long pontificate of John Paul II,” he said. “As a result, the magisterium speaks on every single issue of personal or social morals—but especially on personal morals, sexual morality and violence.” With this hypertrophy of the magisterium, he said, “conscience has, in equal proportion, been diminished; even though Veritatis Splendor affirms conscience is the main instance of morals….”
The above comes from a May 27 posting in America magazine.
Barf Alert Ping
In Frankenchurch, “discernment” means you lean more toward’s the Devil’s temptations than you do towards the traditional church magisterium, the Ten Commandments and natural law.
Doesn’t sound like theology to me. More like philosophy.
A non-biblical philosophy cannot be theology no matter how intellectual they make it sound.
My conscience said it was okay to murder my baby, have same sex, steal and destroy someones business...That’s the church pope Frankie and his thug bishops want...Annnd I’m a catholic....
It is neither theology nor philosophy.
It’s weapons grade bull $#!t
Remember when Communists tried to kill the Pope.
Now we have a Communist Pope.
The error in Guadium et Spes that leads this modernist priest to his conclusions is best described by this excerpt from an SSPX critique:
The obvious theological error contained in Gaudium et Spes (§24) which states, “...if man is the only creature on earth God has wanted for its own sake, man can fully discover his true self only in a sincere giving of himself,” as if man possesses such value in himself that it would cause God to create him.
Here we put our finger on the man-centered turn taken by Vatican II. It is an obviously absurd assertion and incompatible with the idea of divine creation from nothing, which is a dogma of the Faith. The perennial teaching of the Church is that the infinitely just God created all things, including man, “for Himself,” for His own glory, and not because of any intrinsically-possessed value rendering him independent of God (Who made man). Such a doctrinal deviation also alters the exact meaning necessary to define Creation. Moreover, it alters the true meaning that is necessary to attribute to the commandments of loving our neighbors as ourselves (for the love of God), and of considering all men as brothers. In the Council’s changed definition, these commandments are no longer justified by the love of God, Who wants from us this charity toward our neighbor (since we are all sinners), and because of the fact that we all descend from Him, God the Father. Rather, this Council document asserts that these commandments are justified by a superior dignity accorded man because he is man.
The Church has never denied man’s superior dignity in relation to other creatures, which belongs to him because God created him in His image and likeness. But this dignity lost its sublime character because of original sin, which stripped man of this likeness. Thus, it is by sanctifying grace that man is supernaturally able to know and love God and to enjoy the Beatific Vision. In the Catholic meaning, the dignity of man cannot be considered as an ontological characteristic [i.e., a characteristic of being-Ed.]that imposes respect for all choices, because this dignity depends on right will turned toward the Good and is therefore a relative and not an absolute value.
This is nothing new. Just situation ethics again.
The great falling away is seen in all Christian groups I know of.
for what little it may be worth, I liked maybe 95% of what JP2 did.. he was a very pastoral and “caring” man, one who impressed us as being very sincere too
no comment on the current one
Relativism and denial of the external objective existence of the Good, the True, and the Beautiful. Everybody discerns for himself what is Good.
Theology of autism.
I discern that this is something to be very concerned about.
The Good professor better be careful with Vat II documents.
17. Only in freedom can man direct himself toward goodness. Our contemporaries make much of this freedom and pursue it eagerly; and rightly to be sure. Often however they foster it perversely as a license for doing whatever pleases them, even if it is evil. For its part, authentic freedom is an exceptional sign of the divine image within man. For God has willed that man remain “under the control of his own decisions,”(12) so that he can seek his Creator spontaneously, and come freely to utter and blissful perfection through loyalty to Him. Hence man’s dignity demands that he act according to a knowing and free choice that is personally motivated and prompted from within, not under blind internal impulse nor by mere external pressure.
“Discernment” is just a mask for willfulness, i.e., “My will be done.”
Or more simply, “Non serviam”.
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.
