Saturday, April 9, 2016

Amoris Laetitia Paragraph 3 Must-Read (Part 1)



Pope Francis' Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia is far too long to treat thoroughly in one article. For a summary, see the Bear's earlier recent article, which is a summary of the official Vatican summary. "Part 1" means the Bear's Part 1 of how many he knows not. This article will treat the beginning, and one remarkable paragraph.

Very early (in paragraph 3) we find a remarkable statement.

3. Since “time is greater than space”, I would make it clear that not all discussions of doctrinal, moral or pastoral issues need to be settled by interventions of the magisterium. Unity of teaching and practice is certainly necessary in the Church, but this does not preclude various ways of interpreting some aspects of that teaching or drawing certain consequences from it. This will always be the case as the Spirit guides us towards the entire truth (cf. Jn 16:13), until he leads us fully into the mystery of Christ and enables us to see all things as he does. Each country or region, moreover, can seek solutions better suited to its culture and sensitive to its traditions and local needs. For “cultures are in fact quite diverse and every general principle… needs to be inculturated, if it is to be respected and applied.”

It is essential to really digest this short paragraph in order to understand the worldwide shell game that's being played by your Pope. If you read it again, the Bear will wait. (Hums the Jeopardy music to himself.)

Pope Francis has given a gift that will keep on giving long after he has departed the scene. He seems -- to the Bear, who does, after all, know something about forest fires -- to have set out cans of gasoline and matches and given a wink to any arsonists on the scene. This way he changes nothing, nor does he dirty his hands. We've seen this transparent act throughout his whole, sorry dog-whistle pontificate.

His special brand of Pneumatic Catholicism seems to envision a decentralized Church (at least with regard to doctrine and morals stemming from the sacrament of Holy Matrimony, and necessarily impacting the doctrine of The Precious Body and Blood of Our Lord) that is operated by the direct influence of the Holy Spirit on countless individuals, rather than hierarchically.

It's also a big, wet, kiss to the German bishops.

Not bad for paragraph 3 of 300.

Maybe decisions will be limited to official pronouncements by national conferences. But what is a "region?" Big, like a collection of nations? Or small, like one diocese? In any case, one does not get the impression that FrancisMercy is meant to be tied up in a bunch of red tape. Priests will be the ones that will be dealing with these issues. The Bear envisions a parish-by-parish patchwork of No-Communion and Communion Zones for "divorced and remarried Catholics."

Not to beat a dead horse, but the Bear notes that these issues Pope Francis has just tossed to the crowd like parade candy are not exactly trivial. He makes the point that, "Unity of teaching and practice is certainly necessary in the Church, BUT..." FrancisMercy trumps everything.

And with all his speaking, and all his writing, he has never once bothered to explain exactly how FrancisMercy is supposed to work. Has the Holy Spirit ever acted in the Church in such a sloppy and eccentric manner, without careful thought and explanations?

***

The Bear could sure use a fish after a full day with his sensitive black nose buried in this wretched mess so he can bring the best (or worst) of it to his friends.

To everyone who has already sent fish, whether it's a single salmon, a refrigerator full, or a fish-of-the-month club, it all sustains and encourages the Bear in his solitary pursuit of truth. And entertainment. The Bear hopes he has caught up on his thank-yous. He did his best, so if you didn't get one, it was entirely the fault of... somebody else. (Bears are terrible liars.)

If you don't know what the Bear is talking about, see the side-bar to the right.


16 comments:

  1. Right. And of course context is everything. Saying "Each country or region, moreover, can seek solutions better suited to its culture and sensitive to its traditions and local needs" is almost a truism, and would be mostly unobjectionable if followed up with something like "But that should not be interpreted to imply that it is ever licit to contradict the clear teachings of the Church regarding the proper reception of the Eucharist" or some such. But of course it is NOT followed up by any such statement but rather just left hanging. In the context of the dispute, what THAT means is clear. Or rather how it is intended to be taken, is clear.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You know, we almost always think of Africa or Asia when the pope says things like this. They have different cultures, yes, but God made us all human beings with human natures - and all people no matter what the culture respond to the same urges to sin - and as we're mostly talking about lust, we must admit that lust is the same no matter the culture.

      The point is this: does the United States not have a culture?

      So are we being told it's ok to model our spiritual practices on that culture? With divorce rampant, contraception almost the norm, with abortion's blood saturating the land, with sexual perversion crying out to heaven?

      Does this pope have any clue what his words mean? This time, for us, is a punishment and boy, it sure feels like it.
      Barbara

      Delete
    2. And by the way, what does this mean: "time is greater than space?" How does he get away with crap like this?
      Barbara

      Delete
    3. Maybe it's a proverb from Argentina. Maybe, "I've got a lot of time to write this, but I have to limit it into the space of an easily digestible 247 rambling pages."

      Delete
  2. As I said on my own post, this paragraph is a nod to situation ethics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We need a "Francis Ring" of elite blogs like yours.

      Delete
  3. Huge difference between saying "while unity must be preserved, we should feel free to mess around with this," and "while we may take liberties to mess around with this, unity must be preserved."

    This is just such a botch, I don't even know where you would begin, but implicates ecclesiology, our understanding of the role of the Holy Spirit in the Church, three sacraments, and, yes, two marks of the Holy Church. God wanted Peter to scramble all of this with a poorly organized, bloated Apostolic Exhortation? I'm finding it real hard to buy this.

    "Yes, we've lost 'one,' and 'catholic' out of the creed, but we've still got apostolic, and holy, and two out of four ain't bad." (Paraphrasing President Dale from Mars Attacks.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I happened to be browsing through a Baltimore Catechism today (should have purchased it) and noted what you just mentioned, the "marks of the church" and how, this exhortation kicks the legs out from under it in a few ways. I am also noticing the groundhogs emerging from their holes...I mean...varied and sundry bishops posting on the methodology they will use to get out there on the peripheries and pander to the divorced and remarried.
      I'm thinking of getting divorced myself just so I can feel part of this NewChurch which clearly only cares about people in irregular situations. Being married for 34 years ain't getting me nothin!
      As if all this isn't enough, I'm realizing how quickly even faithful men are falling like dominoes in the face of fear, the fear of losing their personal comforts and careers.
      Wow. It's rather breathtaking.

      Delete
    2. Well, Kathleen, we shall carry on, and what's on the Pope shall be on the Pope, and what's on a Bishop shall be on a Bishop, and what's on a Priest shall be on a Priest, and what's on an Ephemerist shall be on the Ephemerist, and what's on the Pewsitter shall be on the Pewsitter. In that order of severity of judgment.

      Delete
  4. Fr. Schall, SJ wraps up his initial read-through with:

    "But when we add it all up, it often seems that the effect of this approach is to lead us to conclude that no “sin” has ever occurred. Everything has an excusing cause. If this conclusion is correct, we really have no need for mercy, which has no meaning apart from actual sin and its free recognition. One goes away from this approach not being sorry for his sins but relieved in realizing that he has never really sinned at all. Therefore, there is no pressing need to concern oneself too much with these situations."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it's expecting a lot to find an exercise of logic in Pope Francis' ravings.

      Delete
  5. I think the Pope is impressed by both the Eastern Orthodox (where in some regions, non-abortafacient contraception is accepted and in others even NFP is a sin, and in some regions Catholics must be rebaptized and existing marriages are invalid, while in others all Catholic sacramentas are valid and even Anglican's "holy orders" are considered valid) and the Pentacostals (where every parish adapts to the "needs" of it's constituents so people who disagree with each other don't have to talk to each other, everyone is happy believing they are following God's mission, so they do so with a vigour).

    My own sense is that the Pope would like nothing better than to regularize the SSPX by making it an eparchy and getting all TLM parishes to be included in that eparchy like the Eastern Catholic Churches so he can say Summorum Pontificum is dead and that all non eparchy parishes must focus on the Novus Ordo according to the fashion of their parish council. In this model, each parish council would decide what Catholic morality needs to be emphasized at each parish and the pastor should listen.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. that and he is dangling a carrot in front of the sspx that they give into him, he'll recognize their dubious marriages and with sspx in the fold rome can say to any conservatives, orthodox and traditionalists opposed to the gnostic agenda that see even reactionary sspx is with us, you have nothing to stand on opposing marriage and communion "reform"

      Delete
    2. Odd to start dating SSPX by throwing an AL pie in their faces.

      Delete
  6. A new version of “cuius regio, eius religio”? – A Latin phrase which literally means “whose region, his religion”, meaning that the religion of the ruler of a region was to dictate the religion of that region. At the Peace of Augsburg of 1555, which ended a period of armed conflict between Roman Catholic and Protestant forces within the Holy Roman Empire, the rulers of the German-speaking states and Charles V, the Emperor, agreed to accept this principle – Wikipedia. Thus, the bishop(s) of a region or a diocese determine whether or not adulterers and other public sinners may receive Holy Communion – for example, in countries such as Germany the bishops would say “Yes,” while in Poland they would say “No”; or in dioceses such as Chicago where Abp. Cupich has no problems with couples in adulterous or sodomite unions receiving Holy Communion as long as they do such in “good conscience.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The toothpaste is out of the tube. This is the inevitable result: an Orthodox style chaos that puts into question the unity and catholicity of the Church.

      Delete

Your comment will likely be posted after the Bear snuffles it. Please, no anonymous posts.

Featured Post

The Day the Book Closed

At Et Cum Spiritu Tuo , I read an interview with a professor in the UK who said parents who read to their kids should feel bad for "di...