Bishops: Be Brave before Pope Francis as Paul before Peter | GoPetition
Since the presentation of Pope Francis’ post-Synodal apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia on Friday, April 8, 2016, perhaps with the exception of Bishop Athanasius Schneider, it appears that there isn’t any other Bishop in the whole world performing the duty incumbent upon them as regards the troubling exhortation. How can it be that as regards an exhortation that ought to be condemned that there is such a deafening silence from those who are the successors of the Apostles, the ones appointed to be shepherds of the LORD’s flock, the ones called to preach the Word they received in season and out of season?
The oft repeated line being offered is, ‘Doctrine has not changed’. This is a red herring, a party line, a misdirection. Given the troubling nature of the pope’s exhortation and the consternation it is has created, the first step of any good shepherd is to ensure that none of his sheep is attacked, consumed or carried away by false doctrine/teaching. Pope Francis’ exhortation needs to be examined under the pure and untarnished light of the Sacred Deposit of Faith [=Sacred Scripture + Holy Tradition] – this is what does not change! – and if found wanting, the document needs to be repudiated and it and Pope Francis be condemned because that’s precisely what the Sacred Deposit of Faith says ought to be done and the one who says this is Apostle St. Paul, whom you succeed in office. The same Apostle Paul has given the example of being brave to oppose Peter to his face should Peter stand condemned.
The LORD taught that even evil fathers know how to give good gifts to their children and it common sense that a good father will not lay before his children food that he knows is laced with fatal poison or even contaminated enough to make them sick. How is it then the successors to the Apostles can be so silent about Amoris Laetitia when the duty incumbent upon such a successor is to be brave as Paul before Peter and call out Pope Francis on his exhortation which is but just one among many of his condemnable actions since he ascended the papal chair?
In many cultures around the world, among many peoples, the glory of men is brave victors in battle. And so the Spartan mothers said to their sons departing for war, ‘Son, either with this or on this’ (pointing to their son’s shield). God foresaw us at this moment which has revealed in our time the War that broke out in heaven. It appears we are faced with that which is almost inconceivable to the mind of an orthodox Catholic, that the enemy in this battle is an enemy from within with the pope as its leader. The whole of Pope Francis’ pontificate has been troubling and now we have a document Amoris Laetitia that is very problematic and replete with many errors on so many levels.[i],[ii], [iii], [iv]
We have even a better Mother, Our Lady, Refugium peccatorum, Consolatrix afflictorum, Auxilium Christianorum to support us than did those Spartans have as they went off to do battle. May she, the destroyer of all heresies, obtain for you all the graces and help you require to stand courageously and tend the LORD’s flock in his sublime name and to be brave to oppose Pope Francis to his face for his condemnable Amoris Laetitia and other acts.
Your Excellencies, your Apostolic blessing for us and our families.
Prayer whenever faced with error, even that emanating from Rome. pic.twitter.com/tAa6u8s8mj
— F M Shyanguya (@TheWarOurTime) July 11, 2016
This is excellent, brilliant, amazing, and at the service of Truth. Well done Members and Friends of Veri Catholici and God bless and yours, and may He crown this work!
Sign the Petitions to the Pope and Bishops vericatholici.wordpress.com/2016/06/25/sig…
Veri Catholici (@VeriCatholici) June 25, 2016
Libellus of Condemnation of the Errors Contained in, presupposed by, or underlying the document ‘Amoris Laetitia’
Mindful of the teaching of Our Most High Lord, Jesus Christ, that our “Yes”, be a “yes” and our “No”, a “no”, and, similarly mindful of the teaching of His Vicar on Earth, Pope Pius VI, of good memory, who taught:
“Whenever it becomes necessary to expose statements which disguise some suspected error or danger, under the veil of ambiguity, one must denounce the perverse meaning under which the error opposed to Catholic Truth is camouflaged”
We the members of Veri Catholici wish to express our loyalty to the faith which we have received from the lips of Christ through the preaching of the Apostles, as handed down in the Catholic Church and fortified by the infallible Magisterium of the Church, in condemning the so called Apostolic Exhortation, “Amoris Laetitia” as a work of…
View original post 2,746 more words
Come possono Gesù e la sua Madre santissima leggere e paragonare queste parole del Papa con quelle di Gesù e della sua Chiesa senza piangere? Como può lo stesso Papa Francesco paragonarle senza piangere? Piangiamo dunque con Gesù, con profondo rispetto e affetto per il Papa, e con il dolore profondo che nasce dall’obbligo di criticare i suoi errori! E preghiamo affinché il Papa stesso o un Santo Concilio revochino queste false dottrine contrarie alle sante parole di Cristo, che mai moriranno, e alle sante dottrine della Chiesa!
Non è possibile, come propongono alcuni eccellenti cardinali e laici (come Rocco Buttiglione), leggere queste poche ma pregnanti parole della Amoris Laetitiaconsiderandole in armonia con le parole di Cristo o con le dottrine della Chiesa!
Qualcuno potrebbe chiedermi come io, misero laico, possa criticare un Papa. Rispondo: il Papa non è infallibile se non parla ex cathedra. Vari Papi (come Formoso e Onorio I) furono condannati per eresia. Ed è nostro santo dovere – per amore e per misericordia per tante anime – criticare i nostri vescovi e persino il nostro caro Papa, se essi deviano dalla verità e se i loro errori danneggiano la Chiesa e le anime. Quest’obbligo fu riconosciuto nella Chiesa fin dall’inizio.
San Paolo resistette al primo Papa, san Pietro, con dure ed energiche parole, quando egli, nella sua decisione pratica, deviava dalla verità e dalla volontà di Dio. Sant’Atanasio resistette a Papa Liberio che firmò una dichiarazione che conteneva l’eresia ariana o semi-ariana, che negava la vera divinità di Gesù Cristo. Questo Papa, davanti alla critica di sant’Atanasio, scomunicò sant’Atanasio ingiustamente, commettendo un errore contro il quale vi furono laici che levarono le loro voci e che fu corretto in seguito. E oggi la Chiesa, che deve in parte a questo Santo la preservazione della sua fede, celebra la sua festa in tutto il mondo.
Alcuni laici resistettero a Papa Onorio che fu poi condannato per eresia per essersi dichiarato a favore della eresia monotelita (che negò le due nature e le due corrispondenti volontà umane e divine della medesima persona Gesù Cristo). Laici protestarono contro l’eresia di Papa Giovanni XXII sulla visione beatifica, un’eresia che Giovanni XXII stesso revocò un giorno prima della sua morte con la bolla Ne super his e che fu condannata nella bolla Benedictus Deus dal suo successore Benedetto XII.
Seguiamo allora, senza paura, tali sublimi esempi di amore per la verità e per la Chiesa e non acconsentiamo mai se vediamo che Pietro è caduto in un errore. Papa Francesco stesso ci esortava a fare esattamente questo e a criticarlo invece di mentire al mondo cattolico o di adularlo. Prendiamo a cuore le sue parole, ma facciamolo umilmente e solo per amore di Gesù e della sua Santa Chiesa, per asciugare le lacrime di Gesù e per glorificare Dio in veritate.
In conclusione: se non è possibile, come non lo è, interpretare le affermazioni dell’AL, quelle menzionate e altre, in continuità con il magistero sempiterno della Chiesa, dobbiamo chiedere umilmente, ma con forza, e in modo deciso al Santo Padre che egli stesso revochi questi errori gravi o, almeno, corregga queste frasi che quasi nessun lettore dell’AL può intendere come conseguenze delle Sacre Scritture, ma che tutti (compreso le Conferenze episcopali come quella delle Filippine) interpreteranno inevitabilmente, più o meno subito, con un significato errato che nessun Papa deve affermare essere la verità. Come il Papa stesso, e non cattivi giornalisti o interpreti dell’AL, ha detto queste e altre cose false, credo che spetti al Papa sostituirle con la verità, affinché la parola della Santa Eucaristia e della Costituzione dogmatica Lumen Gentium si verifichi in modo glorioso e che la Chiesa si mostri a tutti come epifania e “ferma colonna della verità” e come forno di fuoco di un amore e di una misericordia infinita, ma in veritate.
(Source: Corrispondenza romana ›
Peroration of the Talk ‘Some Concerns about #AmorisLaetitia’ by Dr. Anna M. Silvas
Can I exhort you in any way that can help? St Basil has a great homily on the text: Only take heed to yourself and guard your soul diligently (Deut 4:9). We must attend to our own dispositions first. The Desert Fathers have several stories in which a young monk secures his eternal salvation through the heroic meekness of his obedience to a seriously flawed abba. And he ends by bringing about the repentance and salvation of his abba too. We must not let ourselves be tempted into any reaction of hostility to Pope Francis, lest we become part of the devil’s game. This deeply flawed Holy Father too we must honour, and carry in charity, and pray for. With God nothing shall be impossible. Who knows whether God has got Jorge Bergoglio into this position in order to find a sufficient number to pray efficaciously for the salvation of his soul?
I notice that Cardinals Müller and Sarah and Pell are silent. What wisdom their may be in that—for the time being.
Meanwhile, you who have responsibilities in the governance of the Church, will have to make practical dispositions in regard to the thorny issues of AL. First of all, in our own minds, we should have no doubt what the real teaching of the Gospel is, and ever will be. Obviously, whatever strategy of pressing for an official clarification of projected pastoral practice that can be devised, must be tried. I particularly urge this on bishops. Remember how they compromised themselves with their statements about ‘conscience’ in the 1970s? Some of you may find yourselves in very difficult situations in regard to your peers, almost calling for the virtues of a confessor of the faith. Are you ready for the whipping, figuratively speaking, you may incur? You could of course, choose the illusory safety of conventional shallowness and superficial good cheer, a great temptation of ecclesiastics as company men. I don’t advise it. The times are serious, reverend fathers, perhaps much more serious than we suspect. We are being put to the test. The Lord is here. He is calling you. – Source: http://newmanparish.org/Response-to-Amoris-Laetitia.pdf (404 Not Found) | PDF
– Cf. Alice in “Amoris Laetitia” Land by Sandro Magister, ROME, June 7, 2016
The great and saintly Supreme Pontiff Pope St. John Paul II of august and happy memory reaffirmed and taught perennial Church practice and doctrine[i] deriving from and belonging to respectively to the Divinely revealed unchanging Sacred Deposit of the Faith [=Sacred Scripture + Holy Tradition] and is therefore, irreformable[ii], that:
However, the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist. Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage.
Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who, repenting of having broken the sign of the Covenant and of fidelity to Christ, are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means, in practice, that when, for serious reasons, such as for example the children’s upbringing, a man and a woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate, they “take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples.”[iii]
By excising this section out from wherever they reference No. 84 in Familiaris Consortio (November 22, 1981) of the great and saintly Supreme Pontiff Pope St. John Paul II of august and happy memory, Pope Francis & The Synod on the Family 2015 STAND CONDEMNED! by that act alone and because in addition :
1. Pope Francis & The Synod on the Family 2015 failed to reaffirm and teach perennial Church practice and teaching deriving from and belonging to respectively to the Divinely revealed unchanging Sacred Deposit of the Faith [=Sacred Scripture + Holy Tradition] and is therefore, irreformable.
2. Pope Francis & The Synod on the Family 2015 failed to imitate the great and saintly Supreme Pontiff Pope St. John Paul II of august and happy memory who reaffirmed and taught the perennial Church practice and teaching deriving from and belonging to respectively to the Divinely revealed unchanging Sacred Deposit of the Faith [=Sacred Scripture + Holy Tradition] and therefore is irreformable.
3. The Synod on the Family 2015 failed in their function and duty to provide effective assistance to Pope Francis by failing to reaffirm and teach perennial Church practice and teaching deriving from and belonging to respectively to the Divinely revealed unchanging Sacred Deposit of the Faith [=Sacred Scripture + Holy Tradition] and is therefore, irreformable. [Cf. OCT. 12, 2015 | Cardinal Burke: Synods Originally Meant to Preserve and Strengthen Doctrine and Discipline by Edward Pentin | National Catholic Register]
4. Pope Francis failed to condemn, admonish, and correct the Synod on the Family 2015 which had failed in their function and duty to provide effective assistance to him as pope by failing to reaffirm and teach perennial Church practice and teaching deriving from and belonging to respectively to the Divinely revealed unchanging Sacred Deposit of the Faith [=Sacred Scripture + Holy Tradition] and is therefore irreformable.
5. Pope Francis failed to condemn and reject the Final Report of the Synod of Bishops to the Holy Father, Pope Francis, which failed to reaffirm and teach perennial Church practice and teaching deriving from and belonging to respectively to the Divinely revealed unchanging Sacred Deposit of the Faith [=Sacred Scripture + Holy Tradition] and is therefore irreformable. [Cf. RORATE EXCLUSIVE: Bishop Athanasius Schneider reaction to Synod Door to communion for divorced & remarried officially kicked open]
6. Pope Francis alone stands condemned in issuing his Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia which fails to reaffirm and teach perennial Church practice and teaching deriving from and belonging to respectively to the Divinely revealed unchanging Sacred Deposit of the Faith [=Sacred Scripture + Holy Tradition] and is therefore, irreformable.
7. Pope Francis alone stands condemned for the following footnotes that are in the place of, stand in contrast to , distort, misuse and contradict the teaching of the great and saintly Supreme Pontiff Pope St. John Paul II and the aforementioned excised section in No. 84 in Familiaris Consortio (November 22, 1981):
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 , 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).
John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris
Consortio (22 November 1981), 84: AAS 74 (1982), 186. In such situations, many people, knowing and accepting the possibility of living “as brothers and sisters” which the Church offers them, point out that if certain expressions of intimacy are lacking, “it often happens that faithfulness is endangered and the good of the children suffers” (Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World Gaudium et Spes, 51) – Cf. Footnote 329 [paragraph 298], Amoris Laetitia (March 19, 2016).
8. Pope Francis alone stands condemned in distorting and misusing Gaudium et Spes, 51 in footnote 329 [paragraph 298], Amoris Laetitia (March 19, 2016).
9. Pope Francis alone stands condemned in exhorting Bishops, priests,deacons, consecrated persons, Christian married couples and all the lay faithful, an exhortation and teaching that deliberately omits to mention a pertinent perennial Church practice and teaching deriving from and belonging to respectively to the Divinely revealed unchanging Sacred Deposit of the Faith [=Sacred Scripture + Holy Tradition] and is therefore irreformable, and thereby presents an exhortation and teaching that is lacking, distorted, misleading, and that is not faithful to perennial Church practice and teaching which derives from and belongs to respectively to the Divinely revealed unchanging Sacred Deposit of the Faith [=Sacred Scripture + Holy Tradition] and is therefore irreformable, and therefore has performed a magisterial act solely his own and not the Church’s, that is inimical to all orthodox believers who keep the catholic and apostolic faith and which simultaneously is also foreign and inimical to the catholic and apostolic faith.
10. Pope Francis alone stands condemned for endorsing Argentine bishops’ document on Amoris Laetitia | Vatican Radio, 12/09/2016
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. (My emphasis)
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)
El escrito es muy bueno y explícita cabalmente el sentido del capitulo VIII de Amoris laetitia. No hay otras interpretaciones. Y estoy seguro de que hará mucho bien. Que el Señor les retribuya este esfuerzo de caridad pastoral. (My emphasis)
11. Pope Francis alone stands condemned in thanking instead of condemning and correcting the Maltese Bishops for their Amoris Laetitia Guidelines. Cf. Pope Francis Thanks Maltese Bishops for ‘Amoris Laetitia’ Guidelines by Edward Pentin | NCRegister, April 6, 2017
Gratitude sent through a letter from Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, secretary general of the Synod of Bishops.
[i] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith > Letter to Bishops of the Catholic Church Concerning the Reception of Holy Communion by the Divorced and Remarried Members of the Faithful, 5. | Joseph Card. Ratzinger, Prefect, + Alberto Bovone Titular Archbishop of Caesarea in Numidia, Secretary | 14 September 1994, Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross. 5. The doctrine and discipline of the Church in this matter, are amply presented in the post-conciliar period in the Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio. […]
[ii] CCC 2035 The supreme degree of participation in the authority of Christ is ensured by the charism of infallibility. This infallibility extends as far as does the deposit of divine Revelation; it also extends to all those elements of doctrine, including morals, without which the saving truths of the faith cannot be preserved, explained, or observed. [Cf. LG 25; CDF, declaration, Mysterium Ecclesiae 3.]
[iii] e) Divorced Persons Who Have Remarried
84. Daily experience unfortunately shows that people who have obtained a divorce usually intend to enter into a new union, obviously not with a Catholic religious ceremony. Since this is an evil that, like the others, is affecting more and more Catholics as well, the problem must be faced with resolution and without delay. The Synod Fathers studied it expressly. The Church, which was set up to lead to salvation all people and especially the baptized, cannot abandon to their own devices those who have been previously bound by sacramental marriage and who have attempted a second marriage. The Church will therefore make untiring efforts to put at their disposal her means of salvation.
Pastors must know that, for the sake of truth, they are obliged to exercise careful discernment of situations. There is in fact a difference between those who have sincerely tried to save their first marriage and have been unjustly abandoned, and those who through their own grave fault have destroyed a canonically valid marriage. Finally, there are those who have entered into a second union for the sake of the children’s upbringing, and who are sometimes subjectively certain in conscience that their previous and irreparably destroyed marriage had never been valid.
Together with the Synod, I earnestly call upon pastors and the whole community of the faithful to help the divorced, and with solicitous care to make sure that they do not consider themselves as separated from the Church, for as baptized persons they can, and indeed must, share in her life. They should be encouraged to listen to the word of God, to attend the Sacrifice of the Mass, to persevere in prayer, to contribute to works of charity and to community efforts in favor of justice, to bring up their children in the Christian faith, to cultivate the spirit and practice of penance and thus implore, day by day, God’s grace. Let the Church pray for them, encourage them and show herself a merciful mother, and thus sustain them in faith and hope.
Similarly, the respect due to the sacrament of Matrimony, to the couples themselves and their families, and also to the community of the faithful, forbids any pastor, for whatever reason or pretext even of a pastoral nature, to perform ceremonies of any kind for divorced people who remarry. Such ceremonies would give the impression of the celebration of a new sacramentally valid marriage, and would thus lead people into error concerning the indissolubility of a validly contracted marriage.
By acting in this way, the Church professes her own fidelity to Christ and to His truth. At the same time she shows motherly concern for these children of hers, especially those who, through no fault of their own, have been abandoned by their legitimate partner.
With firm confidence she believes that those who have rejected the Lord’s command and are still living in this state will be able to obtain from God the grace of conversion and salvation, provided that they have persevered in prayer, penance and charity. – Familiaris Consortio (November 22, 1981) of the great and saintly Supreme Pontiff Pope St. John Paul II (Sans references. My emphasis)
Four objections, four responses, and one conclusion by Robert Sarah in Overrated Synod. Before All Else in the Church There Is a Crisis of Faith | WWW.CHIESA by Sandro Magister – This is what African cardinal Robert Sarah maintains in his book “God or Nothing” and in the discussion that has followed. An exclusive preview of his remarks in the next issue of “L’Homme Nouveau”
If we analyze certain statements of AL with intellectual honesty within their proper context, we find ourselves faced with difficulties when trying to interpret them in accordance with the traditional doctrine of the Church. This is due to the absence of the concrete and explicit affirmation of the doctrine and constant practice of the Church, founded on the Word of God and reiterated by Pope John Paul II, who said,
However the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist. Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage. Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who … are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means, in practice, that … they take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples (Familiaris Consortio, 84).
Professor Spaemann, you have accompanied the papacies of John Paul II and Benedict XVI with your philosophy. Many believers are now asking, whether and how Pope Francis’ post-synodal apostolic exhortation Amoris laetitia should be read in continuity with the teachings of the Church and these previous Popes. How do you see this?
For the most part, it is possible, although the direction allows for consequences which cannot be made compatible with the teaching of the Church. Article 305 together with footnote 351 – in which it is stated that believers can be allowed to the sacraments “in an objective situation of sin” “because of mitigating factors” – directly contradicts article 84 of Pope John Paul II’s exhortation Familiaris consortio.
What then is Pope John Paul II’s exhortation about?
John Paul II explains human sexuality as a “real symbol for the giving of the whole person,” and namely, “without every temporal or other limitation.” He thus formulates very clearly in article 84 that remarried divorcés must refrain from sex if they want to go to communion. A change in the practice of the administration of the sacraments would therefore be no “further development of Familiaris consortio,” as Cardinal Kasper said, but rather a breach in her essential anthropological and theological teaching on marriage and human sexuality. The Church has no authority, without prior conversion, to approve disordered sexual relationships through the administration of the sacraments, thereby anticipating God’s mercy – regardless of how these situations are to be judged on a human and moral level. The door here – as with the ordination of women to the priesthood – is closed.
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.
And cf. also Pope Francis’ Plane Comments on Divorce & Remarriage | 1P5 and Full Text of Pope Francis’ in-flight interview from Lesbos to Rome – Catholic News Agency (CNA) vs. IN-FLIGHT PRESS CONFERENCE OF HIS HOLINESS POPE FRANCIS FROM LESVOS TO ROME, Papal Flight, Saturday, 16 April 2016
“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'”.
What others are saying and doing
Father Gerstle continues:
The Church has up to now always had a clear attitude [Haltung] in this question [of the “remarried” divorcees], even if there has developed, already for quite a while now, a practice of receiving Holy Communion that is in opposition to the objective norms of the Church.”
Thus, says Gerstle, this current discussion is finally about receiving a “retrospective blessing” for a practice of disobedience about something that has heretofore been gravely forbidden by the Church. With regard to Amoris Laetitia, the German priest says: “In Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis now gives permission to the individual priests and pastors to examine each individual case with regard to the possibility of receiving the Sacraments (Penance and Holy Communion).” Thus, Pope Francis does not anymore, “in a general way, exclude those couples who live in an irregular situation (to include cohabiting couples) from the reception of the Sacraments.” Gerstle stresses that Pope Francis does not anymore demand from these couples the binding requirement to live in continence. He adds: “This is indeed a novelty and is thus being celebrated by the representatives of the liberal direction as being revolutionary and as constituting a landmark decision.” However, in Gerstle’s eyes, those who “feel bound to the valid teaching of the Church, and who fear the watering down of the indissolubility of marriage,” see a “justified reason for the great concern that now there will follow a complete breech of the levée.”
With this new approach, Gerstle says, “the Church’s teaching – according to which the validity of the Sacrament of Confession is dependent upon a penitent’s true contrition and his firm purpose to avoid the near occasion of sin if possible – would be taken off the hinges.” [emphasis added] This would mean “a serious breech with the elementary principles of the Church’s moral teaching, as it had last been confirmed to be the irreformable teaching of the Church by St. John Paul II himself in his encyclical Veritatis Splendor, as well as in his apostolic exhortation Familiaris Consortio.
“Important magisterial tenets cannot be changed by half sentences or somewhat ambiguous footnotes,” the German archbishop said, alluding to the controversy over the post-synodal apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia. He further warned, “Statements that can be interpreted in different ways are a risky thing.”
— F M Shyanguya (@TheWarOurTime) April 15, 2016
Prayer whenever faced with error, even that emanating from Rome. pic.twitter.com/tAa6u8s8mj
— F M Shyanguya (@TheWarOurTime) July 11, 2016
From the unchanging Sacred Deposit of Faith [= Sacred Scripture + Holy Tradition], religious infidelity/idolatry is called immorality/fornication/adultery. The unchanging Sacred Deposit of Faith like God its Revealer does not change. When Israel committed idolatry [= playing the whore with demons/devils], even though they exchanged God, they did not change him.
Now a story about me and the wife of my youth:
I married the wife of my youth. She is pure, very beautiful, the mother of my children. She has been my companion and it has been wonderful together. She has been Mother showering me with such tender loving care.
At 11:30 AM on Friday, April 8, 2016 in Rome, a day which will live in infamy, my papa offered me a mistress saying I do not have to change my wife. My wife is still my wife, she does not, and she won’t change. Some of my uncles and aunties, some of my friends, and even some of my own brothers and sisters are telling me that the offer conditions by my papa are excellent and make it fine since my wife is not changing. To them, a tantalizingly very good offer not to be refused, they are envious. Oh, one more thing, the mistress is not attractive all! She is nothing compared to my wife, and can’t hold a candle to her, not even remotely, … and, she has been around the block … [doctrine of demons]
F M Shyanguya (@TheWarOurTime) June 25, 2016
Words to terrify and literally scare the hell out of all orthodox believers!
One of the most discussed issues during the last months was the interpretation of chapter 8 of “Amoris Laetitia” about remarried divorcees. There were different interpretations: nothing changed or something changed. What is your position on that?
My position is the same as that of Pope Francis, who has indicated that the proper interpretation of “Amoris Laetitia” was given by Cardinal Christoph Schönborn and then again by the bishops of Argentina, for which the Pope noted “no further interpretation is needed.” So if people want to know what I think, they should refer to those sources. I also draw attention to the fine article written by Professor Rocco Buttiglione in L’Osservatore Romano on July 19 of this year, which I reprinted in our archdiocesan newspaper. Professor Buttiglione makes a convincing case for the continuity of the teaching of Pope Francis on these matters with his predecessors and with The Catechism of the Catholic Church.
– Cupich: It’s up to us as bishops of the US to respond to the Pope’s vision, by Andrea Tornielli, 12/10/2016 | VATICAN INSIDER La Stampa INQUIRIES AND INTERVIEWS
Qual è secondo lei la riforma più importante e urgente che il Papa vorrebbe realizzare?
«L’inizio di processi che, secondo la sua personale convinzione, sono quelli che lo Spirito vuole provocare nella sua Chiesa. In quanto tali, questi processi andranno oltre gli anni del pontificato di Francesco e, orientati dallo Spirito, diventeranno irreversibili, perché saranno entrati nel cuore del popolo di Dio». – “Il Papa che vuol far brillare il volto di una Chiesa accogliente” | La Stampa | ANDREA TORNIELLI, Pubblicato il 17/12/2016 – Intervista con Víctor Manuel Fernández, rettore della Uca: gli 80 anni di Francesco, un primo bilancio del pontificato e il cuore del suo messaggio
— F M Shyanguya (@TheWarOurTime) December 18, 2016
With #AmorisLaetitia, Pope Francis Expands
Kasper’s his Proposal
With #AmorisLaetitia, Pope Francis Allows not only the Divorced + Civilly Remarried to Access the Sacraments but also all People in “Irregular” Situations
My argument is in two parts. The first will be questions to ponder upon and the second will be to show that not only was Kasper’s proposal of admitting certain divorced + civilly remarried to communion in Amoris Laetitia, the pope has gone even further and expanded this to certain people in “irregular’ situations” of which the divorced + civilly remarried are of course a subset.
I. Questions to Ponder
1) The pope does not offer us case studies or recipes. Does he have examples of such case studies or recipes?
2) If yes, why did he not offer them for clarity?
3) If no, then on what basis did the pope affirm, in a humble and simple manner, in a note that the help of the sacraments may also be given in ‘certain cases’?
4) With the lack of the required clarity, how are the priests to ensure that the confessional is 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?
One conclusion that one must therefore draw is that the lack of clarity and therefore the ensuing confusion is a purposeful strategy.[a]
II. Has the pope opened up access to the sacraments for people who live in ‘irregular’ situations?
First, the Kasper’s Proposal:
A divorced and remarried person:
1. If he repents of his failure in the first marriage,
2. If he has clarified the obligations of the first marriage, if it is definitively ruled out that he could turn back,
3. If he cannot abandon without further harm the responsibilities taken on with the new civil marriage,
4. If however he is doing the best he can to live out the possibilities of the second marriage on the basis of the faith and to raise his children in the faith,
5. If he has a desire for the sacraments as a source of strength in his situation, should we or can we deny him, after a period of time in a new direction, of “metanoia,” the sacrament of penance and then of communion?
This possible way would not be a general solution. It is not the wide road of the masses, but rather the narrow path of what is probably the smaller segment of the divorced and remarried, those sincerely interested in the sacraments. Should not the worst be avoided precisely here? In fact, when the children of the divorced and remarried do not see their parents approach the sacraments they too usually fail to find their way to confession and communion. Should we not take into account the fact that we will also lose the next generation and perhaps the one after it too? Our long-established practice, is it not showing itself to be counterproductive? [. . .] – Source: Kasper Changes the Paradigm, Bergoglio Applauds
Proceeding to answer:
Since the pope affirms, in a humble and simple manner [what does this even mean and what is its purpose here?], in a note[b] that the help of the sacraments may also be given to those ‘irregular’ situations in ‘certain cases’ and since divorced + civilly remarried are a subset of those in ‘irregular’ situations, then the pope affirms, in a humble and simple manner, in a note that the help of the sacraments may also be given to the divorced + civilly remarried in ‘certain cases’[c]
What might the ‘certain cases’ be?
The pope has never repudiated Kasper’s proposal and it was at his invitation that Cardinal Kasper presented this proposal [which it is now clear was his all along] at the consistory in Feb 2014, therefore the conditions for the ‘certain cases’ to be admitted to the sacraments appear to be 1. thru 5. in Kasper’s Proposal.
“We all know many priests”, he said, who admit remarried divorcees to Holy Communion “without discussing or asking, and that’s a fact.” He added that it is “difficult to handle for the bishop,” and said he was “very happy” that the Pope in the document takes up the controversial approach he has adopted in Vienna.
This involves what he called “five attentions” made to remarried divorcees: a series of five questions the priest must ask to see how merciful and correctly they have behaved before, it can be inferred, they are able to receive Holy Communion. They include how they treat the children of their first marriages, how they treated their abandoned spouse, and how they dealt with unresolved hatred.
With this approach, the sacraments “come into another light,” he said. “It’s about the way of conversion.” – | VIDEO — Schönborn: ‘Amoris Laetitia’ Needs Serious Theological Discussion, BY EDWARD PENTIN 04/12/2016 | NCR
Has the pope opened up the access to the sacraments beyond the divorced + civilly remarried?
Yes he has, because the pope affirms, in a humble and simple manner, in a note that the help of the sacraments may also be given to people who live in ‘irregular’ situations [of which the divorced + civilly remarried are a subset] in ‘certain cases’,
As Card. Pell said after the first Synod in 2014, it was never about the divorced + civilly remarried:
Antonio Socci also reaches the same conclusion:
Naturally – in all of this – Communion to the divorced and remarried is only a pretext, it is a question that interests no-one, not even the divorced: the “revolutionaries” have simply used “irregular couples” as an impetus to demolish the foundations of two thousand years of Catholicism.
And now there is a panorama of ruins set before the eyes of priests who are still Catholic, since – like skittles toppling – after the indissolubility of marriage, everything will come toppling down: confession, the commandments, the natural law. Most of all, the constant teaching of the Church emerges destroyed. – RORATE CÆLI: Antonio Socci: There has been a coup in the Church
[Update FRIDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2016] Whose Side Are We on? by David Carlin | The Catholic Thing
And not just sexual morality. The whole structure of Catholicism will collapse. For if Jesus, who (we should remember) was no minor authority figure in the history of the Church, was wrong about marriage, who knows how many other things he was wrong about? And if Jesus was wrong, it is likely St. Paul and other New Testament writers were wrong. And if Jesus and Paul were wrong, who can be confident in the teachings of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church? One small leak in the dike.
From now on, it should be expected that not only will the divorced + civilly remarried present themselves to the priests in order to access the sacraments, but also people in ALL ‘irregular’ situations.
[UPDATE Sun August 5, 2018]
a. I understand those who prefer a more rigorous pastoral care which leaves no room for confusion. But I sincerely believe that Jesus wants a Church attentive to the goodness which the Holy Spirit sows in the midst of human weakness, a Mother who, while clearly expressing her objective teaching, “always does what good she can, even if in the process, her shoes get soiled by the mud of the street”. [AL, 308]
b. 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 , 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
[UPDATE Fri Feb 17, 2017]
Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio:
… [T] he divorced and remarried de facto couples, those cohabitating…they’re certainly not models of unions in sync with Catholic doctrine. But the Church cannot look the other way. Therefore, the Sacraments of reconciliation and of Communion must be given, even to those so-called ‘wounded families’ and to however many, who, despite living in situations not in line with traditional matrimonial canons, express the sincere desire to approach the sacraments after an appropriate period of discernment. – ‘It gives the feeling of a schism’: EWTN panel analyzes current ‘disaster’ in the Church | LifeSiteNews
The final result will be precisely in accord with Archbishop Bergoglio’s tacit practice for years in Buenos Aires. Make no mistake, the end game is a more or less indifferent permission for any who present for Holy Communion. And so we attain the longed for haven of all-inclusiveness and ‘mercy’: the terminal trivialization of the Eucharist, of sin and repentance, of the sacrament of Matrimony, of any belief in objective and transcendent truth, the evisceration of language, and of any stance of compunction before the living God, the God of Holiness and Truth. If I may adapt here a saying of St Thomas Aquinas: Mercy without truth is the mother of dissolution.
– A Year After “Amoris Laetitia”. A Timely Word by Anna M. Silvas, Rome, April 22, 2017
[UPDATE Mon May 14, 2018]