03 December 2016

The Sound of Silence

Hello, darkness, my old friend.

More and more in the squishy center of the Church are coming to grips with reality.  Francis' silence on the dubia of the four Cardinals risks schism.


Sam said...

There is nothing for Pope Francis to respond to. The problem is not that the encyciical is unclear. Instead, the problem is that Cardinal Burke knows what it means, and he doensn't like it. If he can't submit to the authority of the pope, he needs to resign from the college of cardinals.

Anonymous said...

Thetimman:By asking Francis to clarify the teaching of Amoris Laetitia, the four Cardinals are implying that they do not know how to correctly interpret it. If Francis does not respond to the four cardinals - he is under no obligation to - on what basis would there be schism since the four Cardinals do not know how to correctly interpret Amoris Laetitia?
Tom Lozier

Jane Chantal said...

Sam, if there were nothing to respond to, we wouldn't be having this conversation. The questions posed by four cardinals are straightforward.

Tom, do you not think that the Holy Father has an obligation -- in the spirit of "pastoral accompaniment" if not in his designated role as supreme guardian and transmitter on earth of the teachings of the Catholic Church -- to respond to the dubia?

Anonymous said...

Thetimman: I agree with Sam that Francis has already given us the correct interpretation of Amoris Laetitia. Cardinal Burke has an ulterior motive for making his questions public.
As for catholics responding to Amoris Laetitia , here is how I see it:
Position 1:Rome has spoken the case is closed.
Subposition A : Amoris Laetitia is compatible with Church teaching. Thus obey the Pope.
Subposition B : Amoris Laetitia is not compatible with Church teaching. So what? Thus obey the Pope anyway.
Subposition C : What in the hell is Amoris Laetitia? Thus obey the Pope.

Position 2:Recognize and Resist.Amoris Laetitia is a false teaching , perhaps even heresy.The teaching is resisted but Francis is recognized as being the Pope. The argument from historical precedent is put forth.Thus the Pope is disobeyed.

Position 3:Is the Pope catholic? Amoris Laetitia is heresy. The argument put forth is that heresy is not only an ecclesiastical crime but a sin. Because of the sin of heresy Francis is no longer a catholic and thus he loses his office. Thus there is no Pope.
Tom Lozier

chantgirl said...

Sam, ask 10 different bishops about Amoris, which is an apostolic exhortation, not an encyclical, and you will get 10 different interpretations of AL's magisterial weight, meaning, and how to implement it. The Pope has a duty to uphold Christ's teaching and to teach. The Cardinals have a duty not only to the Pope, but to Christ first and foremost. If the Pope's teaching appears to conflict with Christ's, it is the duty of the Cardinals to ask for clarification.

Kathleen1031 said...

Nor should Cardinal Burke "like" the pope abandoning the Gospel of Christ in order to pander to the contemporary world. There is no reason sufficient to justify departing from authentic Catholicism as it has been understood and taught for over 2000 years. This is what Protestantism is about, and all the 40,000 denominations within Protestantism, novelties and somebody's "better idea". No. That is not Catholicism, and even this layperson can see and understand that.
For me and my house, we reject anything that does not stay faithful to the Catholic faith as it has been taught and understood. We were clearly told if anyone came teaching a different Gospel we were not to follow them. We take that seriously. The current occupant of the Chair of Peter cannot change that. We can't understand how anyone cannot see that what this man teaches and proposes is heresy. He makes his personal dislike for Catholicism plain as day.

thetimman said...

Tom Lozier,

The Pope has not chosen to invoke infallibility by speaking ex cathedra here. This is an apostolic exhortation, poorly written at that. No definitions. So, infallibility is not yet at issue.

However, even an apostolic exhortation would typically be entitled to the assent of faith. That is, unless it flatly contradicted Divine law, revealed truth, Dogma, etc.

So, here is AL, which sure seems to front for denying Christ's own teaching in the Gospel, rejecting St. Paul on the eucharist, and not to mention every single pope before this one on whether public, unrepentant sinners should be allowed (encouraged!) to commit sacrilege by eating and drinking condemnation on themselves. It sure reads that way-- though ambiguous-- and the Vatican sure seems to wink, nudge and bully bishops into seeking it that way.

However. However. The genius of the dubia, and in that genius the opportunity and the danger for the Church, is that the pope is called to end the ambiguity and say-- AL stands for heresy, or it must be read in the least likely way possible (for continuity and conformity to the Divine Law). Whether yes or no, clarity enters the picture. The pope either backs away from the abyss of hell and undoes his woeful liberal revolution, or he doubles down, and most likely deposes himself.

If he does not back down, then the Bishops must act for the good of the Church. They cannot depose him, but according to holier and smarter theologians than myself, they can pronounce that he has deposed himself as a public, obstinate heretic.

Then buckle your seatbelts.

Bsdouglass said...

"Cardinal Burke has an ulterior motive for making his questions public."
What would that be?


Anonymous said...

Bsdouglass: In Sept16 Francis confirmed the correct interpretation of AL:unrepentant adulterers can receive Holy Communion.

In Nov16 Cardinal Burke and others released publicly questions to Francis requesting how to interpret AL. But just days later Cardinal Burke is quoted in the National Catholic Register:"if there is no response to these questions,then...it would be a question of taking a formal act of correction of a serious error".

The Cardinal knows the correct interpretation of AL.It is not the motive for him asking the questions.

Possible motives? 1.Get Francis to recant 2.Give much needed leadership to the catholic resistance 3.etc.,etc.
Tom Lozier