Thursday, March 28, AD 2024 2:00pm

Amoris Laetitia and Lets Pretend

5946532_orig

 

In regard to Amoris Laetitia most Catholic commentators have been playing a huge game of Lets Pretend.  What has sparked this game is the fact that Amoris Laetitia is a stark departure by Pope Francis from what was previously taught by the Church.  Afraid of admitting this obvious fact, most Catholic analysts have been bending themselves into pretzels pretending that nothing has changed, for fear of the unsettling implications that looking at reality head on will raise.  I am unable to join in this game of Lets Pretend.  Facts are facts and it is always harmful, and untruthful, to attempt to ignore them or wish them away.  Father Brian Harrison also is refusing to join in the game of Lets Pretend:

 

 

In allowing exceptions to the ‘no-Communion’ law for those in invalid marriages, Pope Francis is acting against the clear and constant bimillennial teaching confirmed by Pope St. John Paul II in Familiaris Consortio #84, and reaffirmed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (nos. 1650 and 2390, last sentence). Also under St. John Paul II, the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, in its Declaration of June 24, 2000, has asserted unequivocally that the exclusion of such Catholics from the sacraments of Reconciliation and Eucharist flows from divine law, so that no human ecclesiastical law can change it, since it’s irrelevant whether the subjective imputability of remarried divorcees might in some instances be diminished. Why is this irrelevant? Because, says the Declaration, the admission to Communion of those who are publicly living in a situation which Jesus himself calls adultery will send a clear message that the Church doesn’t really take too seriously this teaching of our Lord about the indissolubility of marriage. And this will inevitably cause scandal (in the theological sense of leading others into sin). Pope Francis briefly mentions this document; but only by uncritically using the selective and deceptive citation found in the 2015 Synod Relatio (#85). Thus, both the Relatio and Amoris Laetitia omit altogether the main point of the 2000 Declaration, which is that the obligation of priests and other ministers to refuse Communion to civilly remarried divorcees “is by its nature derived from divine law and transcends the domain of positive ecclesiastical laws: the latter cannot introduce legislative changes which would oppose the doctrine of the Church” (section 1).

Also, this Declaration points out that logically, a concession to some remarried divorcees on the grounds that their subjective conscience may not be gravely guilty will open the way for further concessions, on the same grounds, to many who are living publicly in other objectively immoral situations. For instance, now that some civilly remarried divorcees are to be admitted to sacramental absolution and Communion, will not at least some same-sex couples have to be admitted these two sacraments on the same grounds (i.e., ‘diminished imputability’)? 

Are we now supposed to believe that Pope Francis alone is right on this issue, and that all his predecessors, including the still living Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, and the Catechism promulgated by St. John Paul II, have been wrong and ‘unmerciful’ in allowing no exceptions in this area? If so, why should we believe that? Doesn’t it seem more likely that just one pope is wrong, and that all the other hundreds of popes have been right?

Go here to read the rest.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
10 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
@FMShyanguya
Thursday, April 14, AD 2016 6:49am

It appears we now have a new genre of papal documents: Indiscriminate cut, copy and paste from Church Treasure flavored à la Pope Francis.

Magdalen
Magdalen
Thursday, April 14, AD 2016 3:38pm

“The Church” has not been taking marriage seriously when on one hand she says marriage is indissoluble and then hands out many tens of thousands of ‘annulments’ irregardless of the fact of consummation and the begetting of children. And now, of course, those that still want to go the annulment divorce route should have it quick and easy. Tell me that is not like no fault divorce. But why even bother with that when no impediment is there to communion anyway.

I sponsored a dear lady into the Church this spring. She and her husband live as brother and sister. My sister-in-law went to Mass every weekend and did not go to communion for over 30 years because she married a divorced man who at long last went forward with the ‘annulment’ of his first (and likely valid) marriage.

When they asked Our Lord why Moses allowed divorce, the answer was because of the hardness of hearts. I guess we have returned to that.

Patricia A. Gallagher
Patricia A. Gallagher
Friday, April 15, AD 2016 11:57am

Hard-working diocesan tribunals help sincere and faithful Catholics, cradle or convert or revert, to receive to the sacraments after divorce and remarriage. I have personally experienced this profound demonstration and application by His Church of Jesus’s great justice and mercy.

They mock God who abuse the process of nullity in any way, whether by deceit or cynical bureaucratic sleight of hand, and deprives us imperfect human beings of an abundant stream of grace.

Pope Francis! Cardinals Kasper, Marx, and Schonborn! Don’t do us any “favors”!

@FMShyanguya
Saturday, April 16, AD 2016 2:15pm

@Donald R. McClarey Cf. Pope Francis & The Synod on the Family 2015 STAND CONDEMNED!
*
Please take a look and see how you would word it from a legal standpoint? I would appreciate it. Please also if you would be kind enough to get in touch with me via Contact |THE WAR, my blog. I have something I would like to share with you.
*
Cf. This comment of mine to the request from Bp Conley in his Op-Ed Dialogue, and the ‘Joy of Love,’ from the heart of the Church, Friday, 15 April 2016. It is up to us the Laity:

Newman’s first book had been The Arians of the Fourth Century. He turns now to one of the great lessons he had learned in his researches for that book, “that in that time of immense confusion the divine dogma of our Lord’s divinity was proclaimed, enforced, maintained, and (humanly speaking) preserved, far more by the Ecclesia docta than by the Ecclesia docens, that the body of the episcopate was unfaithful to its commission, while the body of the laity was faithful to its baptism…” (12) Most of this section of Newman’s article consists of quotations from ancient authorities to show that the Nicene dogma was maintained during the greater part of the fourth century “1. not by the unswerving firmness of the Holy See, Councils, or bishops, but 2. by the consensus fidelium”. – NEWMAN ON THE LAITY
Rev. Michael Sharkey | EWTN

Jim g
Jim g
Sunday, April 17, AD 2016 7:16pm

Your premise is wrong from the very first sentence: “In allowing exceptions to the ‘no-Communion’ law for those in invalid marriages,…”

You cannot point me to a sentence in AL that allows this. The Pope did not write such a thing. Sure, there is an ambiguously weird footnote, but that is all, and it certainly does not say that the divorced and remarried can now take communion.

So your whole case falls apart. Go ahead, point out to me exactly where in AL the Pope specifically allows divorced and remarried to take communion. You can’t.

David
David
Thursday, April 21, AD 2016 9:10am

While there is a real pronounced effort to deal with the pastoral problem of many, even most, Catholics: widespread use of contraception, widespread sex outside of marriage, widespread cohabitation, widespread divorce and so on and so on.

There is a veritable lack of effort to treat the root cause of the problem, namely -the widespread use of contraception which has led to all these problems and many many more. The irony of proposing pastoral solutions to what is actually a massive pastoral problem caused by a lack of pastoral action is profound.
Real mercy demands that our clergy preach the truth of Humanae Vitae with it being BOTH a push and pull: 1. the goodness of it and 2. the sin of not following it.

Patricia A. Gallagher
Patricia A. Gallagher
Thursday, April 21, AD 2016 7:36pm

Marriage preparation and advising the spouses during the marriage are properly pastoral functions. That preparation and advice usually includes, or should include, a thorough discussion of the Catholic understanding, and the prospective spouses’ understanding, of sacramental marriage.

However, determining the canonical validity of a marriage (i.e., according to the Code of Canon Law) is a *juridical (not a pastoral) process* requiring a *juridical* investigation and findings.

Once the couple is contemplating separation and/or divorce, or civil divorce has been finalized, one of the spouses may seek information from the local diocesan tribunal which will lead them through the process. Some dioceses refer the petitioner to someone in their parish for help with preparing the initial paperwork.

Most Catholic clergy, religious, and laypersons are not trained to advise persons regarding the canonical validity/invalidity of a marriage in crisis, or one that has already ended in divorce. The role of these parish resources is to assist the petitioner in organizing and writing their story in exhaustive detail.

Determining whether there are grounds for nullity may apply in a particular case is not a matter of pastoral guidance. Widespread mis- (and even dis-) information and honest misunderstanding persists among Catholic non-professionals. Ideally, the spouses have access to *qualified* canonists (attorneys who specialize in the practice of canon law) and/or well-trained and experienced advocates who work for the tribunal. Every case is assigned to a judge and an advocate for the marriage itself. The petitioner has his/her own advocate. If the respondent participates, they are entitled to a qualified advocate.

From the very beginning of the process, tribunal procedures and fees are *not* standardized, and the resources available/assigned to the spouses vary *widely*,* from diocese to diocese. In addition, every single case is analyzed independently and confidentially. No one but tribunal professionals have access to all the evidence in any one case.

Like the car commercials say, “Closed course. Professional drivers. DO NOT ATTEMPT.” Non-professionals, and especially persons who have never been through the process themselves, who attempt to generalize about nullity do a *grave* disservice to spouses in crisis, their families, and the Catholic Church.

trackback
Saturday, April 23, AD 2016 1:01am

[…] your monomania is the Church’s contraception ban, openly gay relationships, communion for the civilly divorced and remarried, or the proper emphasis on sin, you will likely find something in Amoris to delight or horrify you. […]

Discover more from The American Catholic

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Scroll to Top