In the Wake of #AmorisLaetitia, will ‘A Simple Prayer Book’ be Revised? (A Response to Dr. Edward Peters: ‘I do not think that Francis changed any doctrines in Amoris’)

From THE MASS SIMPLY EXPLAINED in A Simple Prayer Book by the Catholic Truth Society [CTS] in His Eminence Vincent Gerard Cardinal Nichols‘ London, there is:

a-simple-prayer-book25

Who may receive Holy Communion

To receive Holy Communion, we must be “in communion” with the Church: we should be in a state of grace, keep the fast of one hour (not required for the elderly or sick), and we should prepare devoutly to receive the sacrament. The Church encourages those who are properly disposed to receive Holy Communion whenever they participate in the Mass.

Those who are living together as husband and wife but who are not married, or who are married outside the Church without permission may not receive Holy Communion.

If we are conscious of having committed a mortal sin, we should make a sacramental confession before receiving Holy Communion.


Now when

[asked] if the exhortation modified church teaching, Nichols said: “There is no question of that…The issues raised by Amoris Laetitia are not core doctrinal issues, these are about how do we live, in very traditional terms actually, everything in Amoris Laetitia is drawn from the tradition of the Church: how do we live the mercy of God and how do we enable people who feel judged, feel excluded, feel as if they have no place, to begin to explore that.” – UK cardinal says on ‘Amoris’, we follow the pope’s lead by Austen Ivereigh, February 22, 2017 | CRUX

The immediate above is from an article which occasioned Dr. Edward Peters to write:

Cardinal Vincent Nichols’ echoing of claims that Amoris laetitia changed no doctrines occasioned a question for me: Am I the only (or among the few) Amoris critics who agrees with Amoris defenders that Pope Francis made no doctrinal changes in Amoris?I am a lawyer, not a mind-reader, February 23, 2017 | In the Light of the Law – A Canon Lawyer’s Blog

Now if the Cardinal says, ‘on ‘Amoris’, we follow the pope’s lead’ and that no core doctrinal issues are raised by Amoris Laetitia and Dr. Peters ‘agrees with Amoris defenders that Pope Francis made no doctrinal changes in Amoris’, surely THEY MUST AGREE that the teaching [=doctrine] in ‘Who may receive Holy Communion’ in CTS’ ‘A Simple Prayer Book’ MUST BE REVISED in the wake of #AmorisLaetitia, for example, as follows:

Who may receive Holy Communion
(Revised in the Wake of Amoris Laetitia)

To receive Holy Communion, we must be “in communion” with the Church: we should be in a state of grace, keep the fast of one hour (not required for the elderly or sick), and we should prepare devoutly to receive the sacrament. The Church encourages those who are properly disposed to receive Holy Communion whenever they participate in the Mass.

Those who are living together as husband and wife but who are not married, or who are married outside the Church without permission may not receive Holy Communion but following Pope Francis’ Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (March 19, 2016), in certain cases, the sacraments may also be given to people who live in ‘irregular’ situations.[1],[2],[3],[4]

If we are conscious of having committed a mortal sin, we should make a sacramental confession before receiving Holy Communion.


Footnotes:

[1] In certain cases, this can include the help of the sacraments. Hence, “I want to remind priests that the confessional must not be a torture chamber, but rather an encounter with the Lord’s mercy” (Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium [24 November 2013], 44: AAS 105 [2013], 1038). I would also point out that the Eucharist “is not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak” (ibid., 47: 1039). – Cf. Footnote 351 [paragraph 305], Amoris Laetitia (March 19, 2016).

[2] “Naturally this poses the question: what does the Pope say in relation to access to the sacraments for people who live in ‘irregular’ situations?”, continued the cardinal. “Pope Francis reiterates the need to discern carefully the situation in keeping with St. John Paul II’s Familiaris consortio. ‘Discernment must help to find possible ways of responding to God and growing in the midst of limits. By thinking that everything is black and white, we sometimes close off the way of grace and of growth, and discourage paths of sanctification which give glory to God’. … In the sense of this ‘via caritatis’, the Pope affirms, in a humble and simple manner, in a note that the help of the sacraments may also be given in ‘certain cases’. But for this purpose he does not offer us case studies or recipes, but instead simply reminds us of two of his famous phrases: ‘I want to remind priests that the confessional should not be a torture chamber but rather an encounter with the Lord’s mercy’ and the Eucharist ‘is not a prize for the perfect but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak’”. – Presentation of the post-Synodal apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia: the logic of pastoral mercy, 08.04.2016

[3] Expressing his appreciation for the ‘pastoral charity’ contained in the bishops’ document, Pope Francis insists “there are no other interpretations” of the apostolic exhortation which he wrote at the conclusion of the two synods on the family in 2014 and 2015. – Pope endorses Argentine bishops’ document on Amoris Laetitia

Cf. Francisco > Cartas > 2016 > Carta del Santo Padre Francisco a los Obispos de la Región Pastoral de Buenos Aires en Respuesta al Documento “Criterios Básicos para la Aplicación del Capítulo VIII de la Amoris Laetitia” (5 de Septiembre de 2016)

[4] And a few days later, during the flight from Lesbos to Rome, Francis once again proposed Schönborn as the main exegete of the post-synodal exhortation, he being a “great theologian [who] knows well the doctrine of the faith,” as the pope described him. To the question of whether for the divorced or remarried there now is or is not the possibility, formerly precluded, of receiving communion, the pope responded with a peremptory and for once unmistakable: “Yes. Period.” But he recommended that none other than Schönborn be consulted for a more detailed reply. – The German Option of the Argentine Pope

Francis Rocca of The Wall Street Journal mentioned the recent Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation and asked whether or not has been any change in the discipline concerning reception of the sacraments by the divorced and remarried.

I could say “yes” and leave it at that. But that would be too brief a response. I recommend that all of you read the presentation made by Cardinal Schönborn, a great theologian. He is a member of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and he knows the Church’s teaching very well. Your question will find its answer in that presentation. Thank you. – In-Flight Press Conference from Lesvos to Rome (Papal Flight, 16 April 2016) | Francis

Cf. Pope says Schonborn interpretation on Communion for remarried is the final word by John-Henry Westen, Sat Apr 16, 2016 | LifeSite and Video, April 17, 2016: Pope Francis’ Plane Comments on Divorce & Remarriage | 1P5


[UPDATE: April 6, 2017]

Pope Francis Thanks Maltese Bishops for ‘Amoris Laetitia’ Guidelines by Edward Pentin | NCR
Gratitude sent through a letter from Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, secretary general of the Synod of Bishops.


Conclusion

Cardinal Nichols, Dr. Peters, and all of Amoris defenders who say that Pope Francis Pope Francis made no doctrinal changes in Amoris, MUST ACCEPT THAT he has done so de facto even when they insist he hasn’t done so  de jure i.e., he hasn’t changed the Church teaching on the matter in, for example, the Catechism of the Catholic Church or the Code of Canon Law, etc.


Episode 12: Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke | TWTC By CHRISTOPHER R. ALTIERI | APRIL 2, 2017:

CRA: On the broader issue – because we got very quickly down to some very narrow and quite technical things – going back to the slightly broader question: we’ve seen bishops’ conferences, individual bishops, offer different interpretations of the post-Synodal Exhortation and especially [of] the things that appear to be in chapter 8. I have to say that I was sort of surprised to see whole conferences crafting more-or-less legally binding implementations of a thing that the Holy Father himself has said changes neither doctrine nor discipline. Is there a simple misunderstanding here about the right interpretative key? I know you’ve talked about this a little be, but I’d like – on a practical level – I’d like to dig into it.

RLCB: Yes, well. I travel a great deal now to different parts of the Church, and what I find everywhere is a great confusion about these matters, and division: between priests, and between bishops, and even between conferences of bishops, and this is the difficulty when people try to make change without respect for the doctrine – the constant doctrine and discipline of the Church – and so you end up with sometimes radically different practices [from] one part of the Church to another, and this cannot possibly be, because marriage and the Holy Eucharist are the same in every time and every place of the Church. So, we need to deal – right now – with all this confusion and put an end to it.

That’s one of the reasons why, together with three other Cardinals, we proposed these questions, or dubia, to the Pope: so that he could set this forth, and dispel a great deal of this confusion, because confusion is never helpful – and I don’t know what it means to say that changes neither doctrine nor discipline. Change has to follow doctrine and discipline. If it doesn’t, then in fact it is either weakening doctrine or even contradicting doctrine and discipline. Reason itself teaches us this.

CRA: That’s the thing that is consternating to me here – and I can speak as a Catholic – reading the document, and having the insistence from people who are the Holy Father’s appointed interpreters and mouthpieces on this, saying that this is development in continuity with doctrine, with standing doctrine, so we’re seeing doctrinal development in continuity with the tradition. I can see how, for a certain value of the term, we are dealing with doctrinal development. It’s developing from one doctrine into another, it would seem.

RLCB: And that can’t be. In other words, doctrinal development means that we have come to a deeper understanding of what is the constant teaching of the Church, and are able to give fuller expression to it, but it does not mean that we change the doctrine or that we go away from it, and that’s the difficulty with the people who call this interpretation of the famous chapter 8 a “doctrinal development”. If the doctrinal development means that now, in the Church, those who are living in irregular matrimonial situations may receive the Sacraments, then this isn’t doctrinal development: this is a change in the Church’s teaching.

In fact, there is a commentator in the United States, Ross Douthat – [Do-that] I think – is how you pronounce his name, but I could be pronouncing it incorrectly – and a certain bishop in the United States gave an interpretation [to Amoris 8], which was radically contrary to what the Church has always taught and practiced, and this commentator – I believe he is a convert to Catholicism, but – he just simply said [that] from the point of view of reason, this is the end of the Church’s teaching on the indissolubility of marriage – and I believe that he’s correct.

(All emphases mine)


[UPDATE: April 6, 2017]

Of course, the innovators are not fools. They realize that the de facto changes MUST translate de jure.

Cf. Reform movement says canon law must be amended by Christa Pongratz-Lippitt, Germany | LA CROIX – “The way the bishops and local Churches have reacted to “Amoris Laetitia” has been an acid test for the Church’s capacity to implement reforms.”


[UPDATE: October 9, 2017]

Cf. @Pontifex & Collaborators Moving to Render Can. 915 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law Irrelevant? Posted on October 7, 2017 by thewarourtime