Theologians & Scholars Formally Request Correction of Amoris Laetitia

Does it?
Oh dear.
What truth shall I remove so you can have peace Joe? I will then edit my post.

Shall I remove... The devil causes confusion,
or
Pope Francis welcomes confusion?

 

Whatever.

 

No rant?
What have you done with the real Joe? or are you Viv?

 

Whoever.

 

Lads a bit of humour to lighten the mood goes a long way. I do love the Lord of the rings...

Get the whiskies in whose round is it

 

Well it must be mine..

If Joe doesnt release his grip from the unapproved he wont be buying anyone anything.You would have thought his belief in LTTW would have taught him a lesson in his ability to discern.
Ability -0

 

(Joe: I had to cut chunks out of your post that I'm responding to fit in my response).
Hasn't Pope Francis made access to the Tribunals easier for people who can't afford Canon lawyers? That lady may well have qualified for an annulment. A marriage tribunal may have deemed the man incapable of taking marriage vows at the time of the marriage. That's what Tribunals are for, but now the Pope has both made access to Tribunals easier and given individual priests the authority of a Tribunal provided the Bishop allows this internal forum approach.

If you want to know how the pastoral approach works, you need look no further than Austria where Cardinal Schonborn has been practising the internal forum solution. Lumena's friend could have married in the registry office, talked to the priest, and received Communion provided she didn't bad mouth the errant husband. Her husband could have done the same had he proved that he was supporting her children. None of Cardinal Schonborn's solutions addresses the issue of whether the first marriage was valid when the vows were taken. That's what Tribunals are for, but Cardinal Schonborn's solution pre-empts Tribunal decisions and, much though you think you know the Pope's mind on this, we have it out of the Pope's own mouth that Cardinal Schonborn is the person who knows what the Pope means. Therefore, the Pope expects us Catholics to discount every interpretation except the one given by Cardinal Schonborn. Pope Francis himself gave us an example of how the pastoral approach works when he told the Argentinian woman by phone that she should find another priest who would give her Communion.

Jesus said that the gates of hell would not prevail against His Church. Catholics have always believed that the Church will never teach error, and it hasn't. The Church has never, ever taught that no Pope would be a heretic or an apostate. Pope Francis and his cabal are well aware of this and are too smart to actually write into a magisterial document what is clearly contrary to 2000 years of Church teaching. Rather, they have produced this Mills & Boon version of "love" in language that is open to all kinds of interpretation and provides cover for the likes of Marx and Schonborn. We don't need to wait for some future generation to see where this unravelling of Catholic teaching on marriage will take us. The Protestants have shown us where it leads. And the Pope told Mr. Scalfari where he intends it to lead: anyone who asks will be given Communion. That includes people living in civil marriages, hetero or homo sexual, and the Pope has already prepared the ground for it. As he told Mr. Scalfar, it will take a while but it will happen. I'll bet that the seers and locutionists that many here follow so avidly wish they were half as accurate in their prophesies as Mr. Scalfari.

I very much doubt that there is a single Austrian or German in the dire circumstances of a Jewish woman divorced by her husband at the time that Jesus told the disciples that any man marrying such a woman caused her to commit adultery. I get it that you and others want to defend the Papacy by defending the Pope. What I don't get is this portrayal of Pope Francis as a new, improved Jesus. He isn't. He isn't even a half decent Pope. He is dismantling Church teaching by stealth, using the tactics of those who have destroyed marriage and the family in Western cultures to the stage that marriage means anything you want it to mean and selling the organs of unwanted babies is no big deal. He uses the very same type of hard cases to effect a gradual change in the law. Those of you who whine about his opponents being schismatic need to take another look at who he is promoting to influential roles in the Church and you need to look at whom he is presenting as role models for Catholics. How many of them gave 100% loyalty to previous popes? How many of them continued preaching and practising what previous popes declared to be against Church teaching while pretending to be loyal to the See of Peter? Can a Protestant theologian be invincibly ignorant of Church teaching? If not, how can such a person be qualified for the post of editor of a Catholic newspaper in a Catholic country? The Pope has decided that his message to Catholics will be filtered through a man who to all intents and purposes is a heretic.

The Pope is anything but clear about who can approach the altar. He is anything but clear about what is a valid marriage. The only thing he is clear about is that he thinks anyone within the Church who disagrees with him and his inner circle are Pharisees or whatever class of heretic he thinks makes him and his friends appear more Christlike. He's a disgrace.

 

From 2011:
Annulment nation
The United States, with 6 percent of the world’s Catholics, accounts for 60 percent of the Church’s annulments.

Catholic World Report

Excerpt:

The annulment scandal

In their annual addresses to the Roman Rota, Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI have offered blunt criticism of the large number of annulments granted worldwide, particularly on the grounds of defect of consent.

“For the canonist the principle must remain clear that only incapacity and not difficulty in giving consent and in realizing a true community of life and love invalidates a marriage,” said Pope John Paul in 1987. “Only the most severe forms of psychopathology impair substantially the freedom of the individual,” he said the following year, as he called upon defenders of the bond to prevent “tensions and difficulties, inevitably involved in the choice and achievement of the ideals of marriage, from being confused with the signs of a serious pathology.”

In 2009, Pope Benedict, quoting Pope John Paul, spoke of the “urgent need” of “preserving the ecclesial community from the scandal of seeing the value of Christian marriage being destroyed in practice by the exaggerated and almost automatic multiplication of declarations of nullity, in cases of the failure of marriage, on the pretext of some immaturity or psychic weakness on the part of the contracting parties.”

“We concur with those statements by both popes,” says Leary. “The current statistics on annulments mandated by US tribunals are truly a scandal, and I have appreciated the popes making these statements…Save Our Sacrament receives many, many requests for help from mostly women respondents. Many of these respondents are good, upstanding Catholics who have three or more grown children, and whose husbands are simply going through midlife crises and want an easy way to remarry in the Roman Catholic Church, which is, more often than not, granted.”

“Scandal is an attitude or behavior that leads others to do evil,” says Mac- Farlane, whose husband left her and pursued a civil divorce without her consent. “Tribunal judges give scandal to the general public, priests, and dissatisfied spouses.… Exaggerated multiplication of annulments is diocesan-sanctioned cooperation with the evil of no-fault divorce.”

“When tribunals require civil divorce, and then issue nearly automatic annulments, the public concludes the Church has no objection whatsoever to divorce,” MacFarlane adds. “Dissatisfied spouses are scandalized by the prevalent annulment mentality of local tribunals. Therefore, they choose divorce rather than persevering through difficult times.… Priests and deacons are scandalized if they are taught by their local tribunal staff that any spouse who feels his or her marriage has ‘failed’ has a right to an annulment on the basis of immaturity or psychic weakness. These priests will erroneously counsel a dissatisfied spouse to get divorced, which results in the mutilation of an intact family.”

 

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/11/bombshell-pope-to-his-favorite.html
Bombshell: Pope to His Favorite Journalist: "All the Divorced who ask will be admitted [to Communion]"


Yes, he said it over the phone to his favorite journalist, Italian editor Eugenio Scalfari of La Repubblica (the Pope's favorite newspaper), in a conversation on October 28, revealed by the latter in an editorial published this Sunday.

There is no reason to doubt its general accuracy. We are way past the time of doubting the general accuracy of the Scalfari quotes. Not now, that the papal interviews to Scalfari have been published on the Vatican website, that they have been occasionally published by the Vatican publishing house (LEV) itself - for instance, as part of the book to the right.

It was a direct quote by Scalfari, as the Pope explained to his dear Atheist friend what the Synod had decided (in fact as an answer to another editorial on the Synod Scalfari had published in Repubblica).



The quote is the following:

In the same phone conversation of the past Wednesday, he declared himself very interested in the article I had dedicated to him two Sundays beforehand. He asked me what I thought of the conclusions of the Synod on the family. I responded -- as I had already written -- that the compromise that the Synod had reached did not seem to take into account the changes had had taken place in the family in the past fifty years, [and] therefore pointing towards the recovery of the traditional family was an objective that was completely unthinkable. I added that the open Church willed by him finds herself before a family that is open both in its goodness and in its wickedness, and that it is this that the Church finds before her.



"It is true -- Pope Francis answered -- it is a truth and for that matter the family that is the basis of any society changes continuously, as all things change around us. We must not think that the family does not exist any longer, it will always exist, because ours is a social species, and the family is the support beam of sociability, but it cannot be avoided that the current family, open as you say, contains some positive aspects, and some negative ones. ... The diverse opinion of the bishops is part of this modernity of the Church and of the diverse societies in which she operates, but the goal is the same, and for that which regards the admission of the divorced to the Sacraments, [it] confirms that this principle has been accepted by the Synod. This is bottom line result, the de facto appraisals are entrusted to the confessors, but at the end of faster or slower paths, all the divorced who ask will be admitted." [Rorate translation, emphasis added]


Honestly, friends, is there any doubt that is how Francis, who has championed this notion from the first moment, sees this? Is there any doubt this is what will be (with some variation, some Pharisaic language) in the post-Synodal exhortation? Now what?...

______________ (Editorial, La Repubblica, Nov. 1, 1015, p. 27 - PDF - 2nd page here)
(Source: La Repubblica - tip, image, pdf provider: Secretum meum mihi blog)

 

Pope Francis makes annulment of marriages cheaper and easier

 

Hi Dolours

Perhaps it would have been easier for you and better for the faith if you had cut out chunks of your response.

The scripture says "ask and it shall be given". Just so with Holy Communion and it is, at best, simply mistaken to suggest that Pope Francis is promoting unworthy reception but worse to suggest he is presenting this as permitted by the teaching of the Church or that it should be.

This has never been the case except in the minds and mouths if those who subvert his pontificate and those who wish to exploit it in order to advance their own agenda.

The path to integration is marked out quite clearly and difficult cases are entrusted to reliable spiritual direction as has always been the case.

At the risk of being ridiculed and dismissed once again as a ranter and battler I am obliged to try, however poorly, to defend the Pope and present the truth of his teachings in the face of misrepresentation. The only concern for my good name in this is that detraction may compromise that function.

Refererence by you and Mac to locutions and LTTW in an attempt to devalue my opinion and gift of discernment did not escape my notice. If members wish to look back to my commentary on this they will see my eventual total rejection of LTTW and even a request to Padraig to shut down that thread.

There were at the time compelling indications, across the international media, of an impending economic collapse and I took sensible measures to protect myself from this. This related more to economics than spirituality as far as I was concerned. I am not an economist. Many of my friends better versed in such matters made similar short term withdrawals in order to safeguard access to their capital.

Once again if the Pope suffers calumny and misrepresentation on MOG why should I expect anything less. Far from feeling a victim or feeling sorry for myself in this I rejoice in being allowed to share in his suffering.

Mac no doubt will take pleasure in having wasted both my time and energy in forcing this response and will probably refer to it as a rant. I genuinly fear for the well being of those who slander the Holy Father because God has said that the sins of one generation will be visited on the next.

I fear about what may lie ahead for them and similar fears have been expressed by at least one prelate elsewhere. I can only trust in the prayer of Jesus " Father forgive them for they know not what they do." And follow its example. To that end I have already prayed tonight for my antagonists here on MOG.

 

Joe, I don't care whether you were taken in by some false locutionist or seer. That's all in the past, it happened before I joined the forum and it has nothing to do with what we are discussing in this thread. I have the utmost respect for your sincere defence of Pope Francis and I am irked by the tit for tat back and forth between you, Mac and Brian which does nobody any good. I care that you are blind to an agenda to undermine Church teaching on marriage - an agenda devised years ago at clandestine meetings by people now being promoted to influential positions in the Church and being implemented by Pope Francis who was their handpicked candidate for the papacy. I care that you seem to regard as subversive or heretical anyone who see through all the schmalzy wrapping around this attempt to change Church doctrine by introducing practices that undermine it. I care that you keep repeating the erroneous claim that Christ promised that no Pope will ever embrace heresy. I care that you seem to believe that every word uttered by this Pope is binding on the faithful irrespective of whether it contradicts previous popes or even Jesus himself.

AL merely paves the way for a coach and four to be driven through 2000 years of Church teaching on marriage. It's a disgrace because it opens Communion to people who believe that Jesus was wrong when he said that any man who even looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery in his heart. How can anyone reconcile that teaching from the mouth of Jesus with what Cardinal Schonborn has been doing in Austria and what Pope Francis is permitting wherever any Bishop feels that Christ's teaching on marriage is too much of a burden for the faithful to carry? They haven't changed the Doctrine but they have started the process of making Doctrine irrelevant to what happens in practice.

Some day we all will stand before God for our particular judgement. I prefer to face God knowing that I believed and defended that Jesus meant what he said about marriage rather than adopting the approach that Jesus didn't know then what we know now because he didn't read a book written by the Pope's friend or he didn't have to minister to people in secular Europe or poor Argentina. I pray for you too, and for the Pope and his friends who use obfuscation to sow doubt and confusion. I ask for the Holy Spirit's inspiration for them so that they will stop this kowtowing to the secular, pagan, atheist, money loving world and will stop badmouthing the faithful Catholics they are throwing under the bus as they press ahead implementing their agenda.

 

It seems like such a slippery slope we are headed on. And remember, who is Joe or the pope to judge?

 

your posts are getting better joe

 

This is one of the best posts I've read. You are spot on in your assessment of this crappy situation we are in and delivered your point charitably (not always an easy task).

 

It goes both ways...when you get there, just tell Jesus you knew better then the Holy Father.

Signed Martin Luther

 

Ooooorrrr...Thank you, Lord. Through your grace I did not fall for the great religious deception.

 

There is one path that is safer...Holy Father, I believe you are called by God to save souls.

Not my calling to start the schism.

Good luck,
Brother al

 

I am so confused. On the one hand, our pope and Joe say "who am I to judge", and on the other call us hypocrites and pharisees which condemn us to hell. Is this Jesuit theology?