Would the "answer be to small", because he would like to speak more in support of false mercy to the divorced and remarried contrary to what 2000 years of Christ's teaching has established in sound doctrine? I am not hear to bash the pope, but to pray for him every day, which I have always done and will always do. However, I will not bury my head in the sand as if his statements are rooted in the deposit of faith. They are not. At best, his words on the divorce and remarried are confusing and bazaar.
That is why I said he is mistaken. Honest question here - have you listened to his response? He rather obviously spoke of - not once but twice - the need for the couple to live as brother and sister. Perhaps you can start here to get a better insight as to that moral theologian's stance on divorce/remarried/communion: https://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/communion_of_divorced_and_remarr.htm As to the article you posted... please show how this: is compatible with Church Tradition, especially here: APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION FAMILIARIS CONSORTIO OF POPE JOHN PAUL II It is clear that the letter is a break from Church Tradition.
He is teaching us how to love as Jesus loves. How to be merciful as God is merciful. How to be humble and how to come to know God through our neighbour. How to come to understand God and His Church. How to become holy through the sacraments of the Church. How to be a good and faithful Christian.
And here is part of Pope Francis' daily homily in Santa Marta: “We are afraid to accept and bear the ultimate consequences of the flesh of Christ. Spiritualistic piety is easier, it is a gossamer pietism; but entering the logic of Christ’s flesh, that is tough. And that is the logic of the day after tomorrow. As Christ was resurrected so we shall rise in our own flesh”. At his morning mass in St. Martha’s House, Pope Francis warned against a spiritualistic form of piety that is too absorbed in what goes on today. Taking his cue from the First Letter of St. Paul to the Corinthians (“If there is no resurrection of the dead, then neither has Christ been raised”), Francis urged faithful not to be afraid of “the logic of the day after tomorrow”. A way of thinking that does not stop at the present but looks ahead with faith to the resurrection of the flesh. The Pope noted with a hint of sadness that when faithful recite the Creed, the last bit is always pronounced in a hurry because we are afraid to think about the future, about the resurrection of the dead. “It is easy for all of us,” he pointed out, “to think in terms of the past, because it is concrete and is it also easy to think in terms of the present because we see it”. But when we look to the future, we think it is “better not to think”. “The logic of yesterday is easy. The logic of today is easy. The logic of tomorrow is easy: we are all going to die. But the logic of the day after tomorrow. What will it be like? What will that be like? The resurrection. Christ was risen. Christ was risen and it is patently clear that he was not resurrected as a ghost. In Luke’s passage on the resurrection He says: ‘Touch me’. A ghost has no flesh, no bones. ‘Touch me. Give me something to eat’. The logic of the flesh comes into the day after tomorrow logic.” When we think that “everything is spiritual” and “we are afraid of the flesh,” the Pope recalled, we are betrayed by a “kind of gnosticism”. Ultimately, this was the first act of heresy, the one the Apostle John condemns: ‘This is the antichrist, who denies the Father and the Son”: “We are afraid to accept and bear the ultimate consequences of the flesh of Christ. A spiritualistic piety is easier, a gossamer pietism; but to enter into the logic of the flesh of Christ, this is difficult. And this is the logic of the day after tomorrow. We will be resurrected as Christ is risen, with our flesh.” http://www.lastampa.it/2016/09/16/v...-our-flesh-YJEWsRNatQKKJXUK23jssO/pagina.html
Which part of the Canadian Bishops document shows a lack of loving as Jesus loves, lack of mercy, lack of humility,etc? Without truth, there can be no mercy.
I may be wrong,but it appears that what you see missing in the Canadian Bishops' document is that the Eucharist may be given to divorced and remarried couples who are unable to live as 'brother and sister'.
Just goes to show you that ambiguity leads to confusion. AL is often an ambiguous document with footnotes that don't help. Welcome to the world of double-speak.
