Carl Olson at The Catholic World Report has a keen summing up of this Pap
Ironically, while Francis talks about clarifying doctrine, there’s simply no doubt that Amoris Laetitia, despite all protests and posturings, has instead confused, disturbed, and confounded with its ambiguities and problematic assertions. Insistence that this is all about “pastoral” issues is misleading, at best, since doctrine and practice go hand in hand; you need not be a theologian to see the essential relationship between what you believe and how you live (it might even be that not being a theologian is helpful in this regard). This pontificate has been divisive in ways few could have imagined prior to 2013. In addition, while Francis likes to talk about the “people”, it’s fairly evident that he has little patience for those people who dare question his questionable statements and actions, no matter how carefully, formally, or respectually they do so. His impatience with theological precision and doctrinal clarity is unsettling. As I noted back in December 2015:
I can only conclude that, for whatever reason, this pope has a deep aversion to theological precision (and, thus, clarity) and is quite impatient with how “doctrine” and “dogma” impede his vision of how things should be in the Church. This is troubling on several counts … First, following the logic of Francis’ various remarks, the pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI (for starters) were pharisaical and unnecessarily complex, and thus stand opposed to his vision of mercy. Whether or not Francis cares about such a logical progression and conclusion is, of course, an entirely different matter.
And it’s not just about burying Benedict; it’s also about ignoring St. John Paul II. In the meantime, there is the name-calling, the scolding, and the vague appeals to the Holy Spirit.
Go here to read the rest. This pontificate has been divisive in ways few could have imagined prior to 2013. Preach it Mr. Olson! This papacy is a Black Swan event, and a quarrelsome and divisive Swan it has proven to be.
It is of the utmost importance to recognize that adherence to doctrine as a path to salvation has been relegated to the Church’s back burner in favor of ambiguous ramblings and utterances that appear (repeat) appear, to be aimed at substituting placenta-like nibbles of mercy and pastoral care for sound theology and practice.
The very last thing the Catholic world needs now in these precarious times of an overt war on God’s Church, is a distortion of the core beliefs of our faith and God’s Holy Church.
Our hope is that God will again turn evil into a greater good.
Personally, I think Vatican II was the Black Swan event. Francis is simply the hatchling.
Excellent line from the article:
“The problem, in part, is that Francis’ use of the term “ideology” is something like a shotgun blast: it sounds powerful and gets attention, but the exact target can be hard to locate.”
President Trump should have given Francis a book that he clearly is not familiar with, the Catechism of the Catholic Church
I find myself recalling the following two quotations
“With every day that passes, the conflict between tendencies that set Catholic against Catholic in every order–social, political, philosophical–is revealed as sharper and more general. One could almost say that there are now two quite incompatible “Catholic mentalities,” particularly in France. And that is manifestly abnormal, since there cannot be two Catholicisms”
And
“[U]nprecedented perhaps in depth and extent–for it is at the same time scientific, metaphysical, moral, social and political–[the crisis] is not a “dissolution” [for the spirit of faith does not die], nor even an “evolution” [for the spirit of faith does not change], it is a purification of the religious sense, and an integration of Catholic truth”
They were written by Maurice Blondel in 1907
Blondel, whatever his other gifts, was obviously a woefully inadequate prophet.
[…] THIS PAPACY IS A BLACK SWAN EVENT […]
“I can only conclude that, for whatever reason, this pope has a deep aversion to theological precision (and, thus, clarity) and is quite impatient with how “doctrine” and “dogma” impede his vision of how things should be in the Church.”
The “whatever reason” is that the Pope has an aversion to the Truth, i.e, Christ’s words about being the Way, the Truth and the Life.
Donald R Mcclarey wrote, “Blondel, whatever his other gifts, was obviously a woefully inadequate prophet.”
Well, when one looks at the flowering of French Theology in the 20th century, with the Oratorian, Louis Boyer, the Académicien Henri Bremond, Joseph Maréchal SJ, Marie-Dominique Chenu OP, Cardinal Henri de Lubac SJ, Cardinal Yves Congar OP and Cardinal Jean Daniélou SJ, to name only the most prominent, I would say his prophecy was fulfilled.
Considering the state of the Church in France, barely on life support, I would say that he stands revealed as a false prophet.