#LasVegasShooting – Wherein Fr. Z rants.

fourlastthings1For some days now I have been avoiding watching news and news commentary shows, etc.  So, through a look at my Twitter feed earlier today, I learned of the horrifying events in Las Vegas.

The usual hysteria is now pouring forth from the opportunistic Left on the topic of gun control.  I’d be more inclined to pay attention to Catholics who do that were they even merely equally vocal about ending abortion, which kills a lot more innocent people in our nation than guns.   But they just won’t do it, will they.  And we know why.

I, however, want to move the discussion away from the relatively unimportant issue of attacks on the 2nd Amendment in order to stress a type of control over something lethal that is far more important.

Mortal sins kill the life of grace in the soul.

Physical death is going to happen to you.  You don’t have any control over that.  However, you do have control over confession of your mortal sins in kind and number to a priest who can give you absolution!

I call for SIN CONTROL!

GO TO CONFESSION.

We don’t know the day or the minute when we will go before our Judge.  Whether it is a natural event like a storm or meteor, or a man-made event like a drunk driver or a nutjob with a rifle, we just don’t know.

Avoid the trap of thinking that these things only happen to other people.  YOU are other people.  It’s always someone else… until it’s you.

So, examine your consciences and …

GO TO CONFESSION.

I would also add as a regular feature of your daily prayers that important petition in the Litany of Saints:

“A subitanea et improvisa morte… From a sudden and unprovided death, spare us O Lord.”

Sudden is one thing.  Unprovided is another.  An “unprovided” death is a death without access to the last sacraments, especially absolution from a priest.

That’s a scary thought…. especially if you haven’t been to confession for a  long time.

When did you last go to confession?

Moreover, consider well your living conditions and security.

If you haven’t done so yet, begin to develop a physical situational awareness. Seek advice and training from professionals.

If you haven’t done so yet, begin to develop a spiritual situational awareness.  Seek advice and training from priests.

 

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Four Last Things, Global Killer Asteroid Questions, GO TO CONFESSION, Semper Paratus, Si vis pacem para bellum!, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices, Wherein Fr. Z Rants | Tagged , ,
10 Comments

The unstated racism of the ‘c’atholic Left

There was an article in, of all places, Hell’s Bible (aka The New York Times) about the influence of the traditional Roman Rite in Africa.

This article prompted a spittle-flecked nutty from the usual suspects, such as Beans and Ruff. Beans tweeted in reaction:

Read that again…. “they cannot really comprehend”.

What a racist remark.

This reminds me of Card. Kasper’s Africa Gaffe.

Behold, the true attitude of the Left.

Posted in Liberals, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, What are they REALLY saying? |
14 Comments

Is homosexualist activist Jesuit Fr. @JamesMartinSJ a heretic? Canon Law with Ed Peters.

MSS Creation of Eve Stammheim Missal c 1170 MS 64 smCanonist Ed Peters posted at his excellent site In The Light Of The Law, an illuminating post bringing greater clarity to what heresy is and what Jesuit homosexualist activist Fr. James Martin thinks.

Peters doesn’t have a combox, but I do.

Be sure to visit Peters’ site often.

My emphases and comments.

Further remarks re Fr. Martin

Two important essays, one by Janet Smith at Catholic World Report (29 sep 2017) and the other by Dan Hitchens at First Things (2 oct 2017), along with their links to and quotes from Fr James Martin’s own words (and sometimes, as Smith and Hitchens note, to Martin’s refusal to say certain words), occasion these comments on Martin’s recent complaints (21 sep 2017) that he has “been accused of heresy, ridiculously, by some critics (I’m not contradicting any revealed truths).” There are several issues to sort out here.

First, yes, I am very sure that some [but not all] of the accusations of heresy made against Martin are, indeed, ridiculous. As are some of Martin’s accusations that, for example, among his critics: “Heresy” is a word they use as frequently as [pace Mary McCarthy] “and” and “the.” Apparently there is plenty of ridiculousness floating around out there. All purveyors of the ridiculous should cease spouting it. [What are the odds?]

To my canonical observations.

Martin’s rebuff of heresy accusations above (“I’m not contradicting any revealed truths”) suggests that either he does not know or does not wish to acknowledge that [NB] “heresy” is not limited to the actual contradiction of revealed truthsCanon 751 defines heresy as “the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt” of certain truths (my emphasis [and mine!]). Thus one’s “obstinate doubt” concerning revealed truths, and not just one’s outright contradiction of such truths, can, upon proof, result in a finding of heresy.  [Did you get that?  “upon proof”.  Note well that Dr. Peters has already pointed to Martin’s “own words”. If a person repeats some position, publicly, does that constitute a “proof”? If it doesn’t, I don’t know what does.  However, in the case of a formal charge of heresy, Fr. Martin should be given every opportunity to make a clear, formal statement.]

Next, when speaking to a male questioner recently, Martin expressed the “hope [that] in 10 years you will be able to kiss your partner or, you know, soon to be your husband”. [Blech.] Any reasonable listener will conclude that Martin not only hopes that a man may someday marry a man with the Church’s blessing, but that Martin believes “same-sex marriage” to be radically possible under Church teaching and that it is a matter of regret that such Church recognition is not yet available.  [I believe he truly holds that position.  He talks about this publicly.  That said, I hope that this sobering canonical presentation by Ed Peters will help Fr. Martin take a time out and then make a clear statement in public affirming the Church’s teaching.]

Here, I suggest, Martin effectively denies infallible Church doctrine that marriage can exist only between a man and a woman. I see only two canonical issues in the wake of his statement:

[So… it’s infallible. However… is it revealed truth? An important distinction follows…] (A) Whether the infallible Church teaching on the absolute impossibility of marriage between two persons of the same sex is itself a “revealed truth” (in which case the issue is indeed one of heresy) or whether it is a “proposition to be held definitely” (in which case the issue is “opposition to the doctrine of the Catholic Church”, but not heresy strictly speaking), with the weight of scholarly opinion, however, favoring the view that Church teaching on the male-female aspect of marriage is divinely revealed, meaning that one’s “obstinate denial or obstinate doubt” concerning that teaching would be heresy; and,

(B) Whether Martin’s comment, coming as it did during a public Q-and-A session, accurately reflects his actual position on marriage—an important point because both heresy (per cc. 7511364, etc.) and opposition to definitive Church teaching (per c. 1371, etc.) require a demonstration of one’s deliberateness in so holding before any penal consequences could be levied.  [Martin’s response seems to be his actual position.  If it isn’t, then he would have been prevaricating in so answering, which is unlikely, given everything he has said and written on the topic.  Did he just “blurt” his response without thinking?  I suspect that he has, indeed, thought this through.]

Either way, Martin’s shocking (as coming from a priest) comment, uttered against the backdrop of his frequent refusal to state his own positions directly (as opposed to his practice of characterizing his positions as sound, etc.) make the pursuit of clarity here very important.

Scholion on Pio-Benedictine law and the Eastern Code.

Martin’s frequent, often seemingly studied, ambiguities regarding Church teaching on various doctrinal and moral issues would have been more directly cognizable [Fr. Z kudos for the great word “cognizable”.] under the Pio-Benedictine Code of 1917 than they are under the Johanno-Pauline Code of 1983, notwithstanding 1983 CIC 209. The old Code squarely stated: “The faithful of Christ are bound to profess their faith whenever their silence, evasiveness, or manner of acting encompasses an implied denial of the faith, contempt for religion, injury to God, or scandal for a neighbor.” 1917 CIC 1325 § 1. Of course, giving scandal (CCC 2284-2287) to one’s neighbor, even if not directly scored in the new Code, is still a grave evil against [which] all should be on guard. Similarly, Canon 10 of the Code of Canon Law of the Eastern Churches (1990) makes ‘adherence to the authentic living magisterium of the Church’ and the ‘open profession of the Faith’ matters of law. Interesting, eh? [Very.]

This was a useful post, as virtually all of Prof. Peters posts on law are.

I think that if Fr. James Martin wants to continue to preach or to speak publicly on any Church property, he should be asked directly to affirm the Church’s teaching concerning marriage.  It is sad to have to say that, but he has brought this on himself by his own words and his own silences.

The comment moderation queue is ON.

 

Posted in Canon Law, One Man & One Woman, Sin That Cries To Heaven | Tagged , , , ,
19 Comments

A hellish enemy is at work in the Church

Domenichino_GuardianAngelOn this beautiful Feast of our Guardian angels, we must remember the invisible role they inevitably play in our lives.  On a plane of being that we humans cannot sense, the holy angels thwart the attacks of hellish fallen angels, bent on our everlasting perdition.  We should express gratitude to God and to our angels often, and we should call upon our angels in good times and in bad.  Even as they work with us, they know God’s will for us and they behold His face (Matthew 18:10).

Now, turn your mind to the fallen angelic agents of Hell, the Enemy of your soul.

Consider not only the unrelenting the malice of the Enemy of the soul, but also the  Enemy’s, literal, diabolical genius.

First, the fallen angels never sleep, never tire, are never distracted, have no need to travel from point a to b, and they never miss what you are up to.  If a government agency can build a profile of you based on bits and pieces of metadata, try to imagine how a fallen angel sees you.  They know precisely where to hit with a suggestion, a tug on an appetite, a prod of perfectly timed deception.

Next, their long term goal (keeping you from heaven) depends on your not paying attention to them.  Hence, it serves them and their scheme well to diminish both belief in them as well as understanding what they are.  Today we even see TV shows – one is even called “Lucifer” – which will surely twist people’s understanding away from their true nature and motives.

We all face, every day, three great obstacles to our present and authentic and our future and eternal happiness: the world, the flesh and the Devil.  Of the three, one is a person, the active subject of its own actions.  We ignore the Enemy at our deepest peril.

At Crisis be sure to read today about the crisis we face. Sober and true.  My emphases and comments.

A Dark-Forces Assault on the Church?
WILLIAM KILPATRICK

For we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the principalities and powers … against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. (Eph. 6:12)

It’s not easy to discern the role played by the spiritual hosts of wickedness in world affairs. No one knows with any certainty what is going on in that realm, or what part the principalities and powers play in shaping events. But these are exceedingly strange times—so strange that it is difficult to make sense of some of what is happening from a this-worldly perspective. So it seems worthwhile to try to understand some war-in_heaven_archangel-michaelphenomena from an other-worldly viewpoint. [While we cannot detect with our human senses what goes on in the angel “metaphysical” plane, can we doubt for an instant that there’s a lot going on?  And are we so naive as to imagine that it doesn’t affect us?  Remember: the fallen angels have already received their irrevocable fate in their rejection of God and His plan.  The only thing left for them is to try to prevent God’s glory from being magnified in His creature, us.  Each time a soul is lost to Hell, the Enemy crows, “That’s one more You don’t have!”]

One of the strangest developments of our times is the Church’s response to Islam and Islamic migration. Since the response runs entirely counter to the Church’s historical response, it seems legitimate to wonder if other-worldly forces are at play. If that’s the case, it should not be unexpected. Christ promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church, but the implication of his words is that hell would surely try.  [Not only try, but also succeed in this place and that.  There is no guarantee that Hell won’t win in Europe.  The Church once flourished in places like North Africa and Asia Minor.  Now?]

Over the years, various popes have testified to this effort. In the late nineteenth century, Pope Leo XIII reportedly had a vision of demonic spirits during the celebration of Mass. This led him to institute the Prayer to St. Michael the Archangel (“be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil”), which is said at the end of a Low Mass in the Extraordinary Form. In more recent times, on the feast of Saints Peter and Paul in 1972, Pope Paul VI delivered a sermon warning that “from some fissure the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God.”  [Frankly, if far and wide we don’t get down on our knees and start praying those Leonine Prayers again we are veering towards insanity.]

What may come as a surprise to those who worry about Pope Francis’s liberal tendencies is that he also has frequently warned of Satan’s influence. A few months after his election, he consecrated Vatican City State to St. Michael the Archangel who “defends the people of God from the arch-enemy par excellence, the devil.” When he was a cardinal in Argentina, he described a legislative proposal to redefine marriage as “a ‘move’ of the father of lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.”  [He seems genuinely to believe in the Devil.]

If the smoke of Satan can enter the Catholic Church, [“can”?  HAS!] there is no reason to suppose it cannot enter other religions as well. [Not only enter them… START them.] Without getting into the question of whether Muhammad was deceived by Satan, as some maintain, it is probable that Satan seeks to influence the direction of Islam just as he strives to have a malign influence on the Catholic Church. [At least.  I’d go a lot farther than that.]

It may be, then, that the current situation of the Church vis-à-vis Islam is due in part to a dual assault—one aimed at heightening Islam’s traditional aggressiveness, [NB:] and the other aimed at weakening the Church’s traditional defenses. The result is a kind of dance of death: a ramping up of Islamic militancy matched by an exaggerated emphasis on tolerance, openness, and welcoming on the part of Catholics.  [This is undoubtedly true!]

If this is the case, then one manifestation of the Catholic folly might be the Church’s attitude toward mass Muslim migration. Many Catholic leaders think of Muslim migration as no different from other migrations. For them it is simply a question of being welcoming or unwelcoming, of being charitable or uncharitable. But many Muslim leaders view migrations in a different light. For them it is not a question of loving one’s neighbor, it is a question of who is to be master.

[…]

Read the rest there.

May I recommend some reading?  Check this out.  HERE

Also, get these books and get them also for your family and friends.

Defeating Jihad: The Winnable War by Sebastian Gorka.

US HERE – UK HERE

Do you know the word “dawa”? More on this HERE.

And get a Kindle!  US HERE – UK HERE

I also recommend The Grand Jihad by Andrew McCarthy.  He explains how and why the liberal left coddles and cooperates with Islam in the destruction of Western culture.

US HERE – UK HERE

 

Posted in Four Last Things, Hard-Identity Catholicism, Semper Paratus, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices, The Religion of Peace | Tagged , ,
12 Comments

Devastated Puerto Rico makes you ponder. PREPARE and GO TO CONFESSION!

hurricane-maria-porto_ricoRecent storms devastated the electrical grid of Puerto Rico.  Virtually the entire island is without power.  That’s over 3 million people without electricity, water, etc…. for months to come.

Consider what life would be like for you were that to happen where you are.  How long would your life be?  How long would the lives of your loved ones be?  What kind of life would you be living if you survive?

The electrical grid of all our nations are vulnerable to the impact of a CME or an EMP.

It is not unreasonable or melodramatic to make preparations against the day that something life changing happens to you.

It doesn’t have to be on the level of a CME or EMP.  It could be a storm, earthquake, fire, etc.

It’s always someone else… until it’s your turn.

Think about what you can do so that you can stay on your feet and move, so that you won’t be a burden to others, so that you can even be an aid to someone else.

NB: If material preparations are important, spiritual preparations are even more important.

Examine your consciences and…

GO TO CONFESSION!

You don’t know the day, hour, minute when you will be before the Just Judge, the King of Fearful Majesty and your soul is laid bare. Your every deed, every word, every thought, every omission will be exposed to perfect view and judgment.  Nothing will remain hidden and God cannot be deceived.

The Judge will give us justice whether we want it or not.  But His saving mercy is always there for the asking, provided that we ask for it… while we still can.

Once you die, that’s it.  You go before your God and your eternal fate is sealed.

GO TO CONFESSION!

penance_confession_steps

 

Posted in GO TO CONFESSION, Semper Paratus | Tagged
5 Comments

UPDATED: Wherein Fishwrap accidentally promotes something good! POLL ADDED

fishwrapUPDATE 20 Sept:

Some of the comments have spurred me to add a POLL to the post.

___ Originally posted Sep 29, 2017

These days I have not been watching nightly news and cable commentary and I am leaps and bounds more cheerful.  Similarly, the less I glance at the National Schismatic Reporter (aka Fishwrap) the happier I am.  However, I more or less have to keep part of an eye on the Fishwrap.  Blech.

Today, however, one of you dumpster-diver readers spotted something fun at Fishwrap.  They have an opinion piece against having American flags in church sanctuaries.  Predictable, right?

However, the op-ed writer at Fishwrap opined:

As a simple step in the right direction, we could stop sending confusing signals and remove national flags from our church sanctuaries. Put them in narthexes or church halls. But removing national flags from our church sanctuaries and emphasizing the importance of turning our gaze to the depiction of Christ crucified at the front of the space would help us to remember who it is we worship and to whom our deepest loyalty belongs.

What is this I read?

Could he be advocating ad orientem worship?!?

If he is serious about turning our gaze to the crucified Lord… that’s the way to do it.

While we ponder that, here’s a shot from a recent Mass in the Diocese of Madison for the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross… speaking of focus on the Cross.

16_07_01_PontMass_20_flag

UPDATE

So far comments have been added by those who seem to have missed the point.  However, I’m happy to make lemonade from, you know, comments.

Let’s add a poll about flags in church.

Pick your best choice and, if you wish, add a comment, below.  Anyone can vote but only registered, approved participants can comment.

It is acceptable to have a national flag on regular display in a Catholic church?

View Results

 

Posted in Lighter fare, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, POLLS | Tagged , , ,
41 Comments

Wherein Fr. Z’s spidey sense is tingling. Help requested.

fatherZ-spiderman-vincenzo-sancte-pater-s

This image, by the great Vincenzo, brings back memories. VINCENZO! WHERE ARE YOU?

UPDATE: See below!

___

My spidey sense is tingling.

I’m having a flashback… but the details are a little vague.  I need the help of the readership with this.  You have long memories and can find stuff when you work together.

What brought this on?

The catholic Left is making more and more noises about repressing opinions that don’t coincide with their own.  They are sending out whistles and signals.  Some of them say they are tired of converts voicing opinions.  That’s because converts tend to disagree with them.  There are calls for Church authorities to “neutralize” people who don’t agree with the Left and to have them “purged“.

suspect the Left’s next move will be something along the lines of calling for official guidelines or even legislation to “control” what is published (i.e., squelch opposition), a sort of  Fairness Doctrine.

Such guidelines would be unenforceable, of course, but then they would have a sanctioned fire hose with which they could blast Catholics who dared to stand up to them.

And in calling for such a thing, they would, again, betray their hypocrisy.

This is where you readers come in.  I have a fragment of a memory that you must fill in.

Waaay back in the day, during the pontificate of Pope St. John Paul II – of happy memory – the late Archbp. John Foley for many years ran the Vatican’s office for Social Communications.

If I remember correctly, at one point Foley raised the idea of licensing Catholic journalists.   The lefties of the Fishwrap et al., had a full-fledged spittle-flecked nutty breakdown.

Do you remember that?

___

UPDATE:

Once again, you readers have demonstrated your resourcefulness.

One of you sent excerpts from the 2002 document The Church and Internet:

 

II. 8. The proliferation of web sites calling themselves Catholic creates a problem of a different sort. As we have said, church-related groups should be creatively present on the Internet; and well-motivated, well-informed individuals and unofficial groups acting on their own initiative are entitled to be there as well. But it is confusing, to say the least, not to distinguish eccentric doctrinal interpretations, idiosyncratic devotional practices, and ideological advocacy bearing a ‘Catholic’ label from the authentic positions of the Church. We suggest an approach to this issue below.

III. 11. A special aspect of the Internet, as we have seen, concerns the sometimes confusing proliferation of unofficial web sites labeled ‘Catholic’. A system of voluntary certification at the local and national levels under the supervision of representatives of the Magisterium might be helpful in regard to material of a specifically doctrinal or catechetical nature. The idea is not to impose censorship but to offer Internet users a reliable guide to what expresses the authentic position of the Church.

Now we need the lib reactions.

Posted in ¡Hagan lío!, ACTION ITEM! | Tagged
24 Comments

MADISON: 13 Oct 2017 – PONTIFICAL MASS – 100th anniversary of Fatima Miracle

OLFatima-200On 13 October 2017 we observe the 100th anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun that concluded Our Lady’s apparitions at Fatima, Portugal.

In celebration of that anniversary and to give glory to God and honor to Mary, Mother of the Church, His Excellency Most Reverend Robert C. Morlino, the Extraordinary Ordinary, of the Diocese of Madison will offer a Pontifical Mass in the Traditional Roman Rite.

The music will be Gregorian Chant for the Propers.  For the Ordinary, Missa secunda a 3, Giammateo Asola (c.1532–1609), with Motets.

PLACE: St. Mary’s – Pine Bluff, WI. – HERE
TIME: 6:oo PM

All are welcome.

Posted in Events, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Solitary Boast, SESSIUNCULA, The Campus Telephone Pole | Tagged , , ,
1 Comment

Bullying @NCRonline calls for opposing voices to be “neutralized”

Eugene Bull Connor Damn The LawThe root of “liberal” is Latin liber, meaning “free”.  Hence, “liberals”: “Those with whom you are free to agree.”

God help you if you don’t.

At the National Sodomitic Reporter (aka Fishwrap), there is an editorial which reeks of the lib modus operandi: stiffle and crush.

The first hint that nearly every word in this editorial is a lie, “including ‘and’ and ‘the'”, is the title: “Editorial: Stop censoring, have a civil discussion”

They want ‘civil discussion’, do they?

Tell that to their combox fever swamp swarm and their foremost purveyor of “venom”.  HERE.

Speaking of venom, I recall to the readership’s mind the ancient phrase, “in cauda venenum… the poison is in the tail”, that is, the real point comes at the end.

Here is the final line of the Fishwrap editorial:

Leaders of our institutions, in turn, must do their part to neutralize the cyberbullies. They must not capitulate.

“Leaders… must neutralize….”

It’s all about whom they would permit to speak. That’s the real point, the true agenda of their long ramble.

Agree with the Fishwrap and Amerika and you are on the good list, not only permitted but promoted to speak.

Disagree with the Fishwrap, etc., and you are to be silenced by authorities who, through force, must gag you and make you disappear.  You must be neutralized.

You must be neutralized.

They’re terrified over there, friends, because they no longer have iron control over whose voices are allowed to raise questions and make statements.  Hence, they turn to force.  Call the authorities to bring in the dogs and the fire hoses.

Bullying, thy name is Fishwrap.

YouTube thumbnailYouTube icon

 

Posted in Biased Media Coverage, Liberals, Si vis pacem para bellum!, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices, You must be joking! | Tagged , ,
8 Comments

Pope Francis comments on ‘Amoris laetitia’ with Columbian Jesuits

In the UK’s best Catholic weekly, the Catholic Herald (which sports my regular column in the print edition – SUBSCRIBE!), there is republished a note about comments made by Pope Francis about reading Amoris laetitia.  The Pontiff spoke off-the-cuff to some Columbian Jesuits and opined:

“I want to repeat clearly that the morality of ‘Amoris Laetitia’ is Thomist”.

Some defenders of the objectively ambiguous elements of Amoris, which have caused so much confusion and manifest division, immediately started hopping up and down and pointing, “See! See! Indirect response to the Dubia!  And 2+2=5!”  Fishwrap, for example: “Francis responds to critics: Morality of ‘Amoris Laetitia’ is Thomist”

It is always interesting to read what Popes think, but let’s not get too oyfgetrogn about off-the-cuff remarks, which have no official weight.

Here’s the story:

Seeing, understanding and engaging with people’s real lives does not “bastardise” theology, rather it is what is needed to guide people toward God, Pope Francis told Jesuits in Colombia.

“The theology of Jesus was the most real thing of all; it began with reality and rose up to the Father,” he said during a private audience Sept. 10 in Cartagena, Colombia.

Meeting privately with a group of Jesuits and laypeople associated with Jesuit-run institutions in Colombia, the pope told them, “I am here for you,” not to make a speech, but to hear their questions or comments.  [So, from the onset he didn’t intend to resolve anything.]

A Jesuit philosophy teacher asked what the pope hoped to see in philosophical and theological reflection today, not just in Colombia, but also in the Catholic Church in general.

Philosophy, like theology, the pope said, cannot be done in “a laboratory,” but must be done “in life, in dialogue with reality.” [Can’t it be done in both settings?]

The pope then said that he wanted to use the teacher’s question as an opportunity address — in justice and charity — the “many comments” concerning the post-synodal apostolic exhortation on the family, “Amoris Laetitia.”

Many of the commentaries, he said, are “respectable because they were made by children of God,” but they are “wrong.”

In order to understand ‘Amoris Laetitia,’ you must read it from the beginning to the end,” reading each chapter in order, reading what got said during the synods of bishops on the family in 2014 and 2015, and reflecting on all of it, he said. [Okaaaaay…. ]

To those who maintain that the morality underlying the document is not “a Catholic morality” or a morality that can be certain or sure, “I want to repeat clearly that the morality of ‘Amoris Laetitia’ is Thomist,” that is, built on the moral philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas, he said.

One of best and “most mature” theologians today who can explain the document, he told them, is Austrian Cardinal Christoph Schonborn of Vienna. [There are other theologians out there, as well-prepared as Card. Schonborn, who asked for clarifications.]

“I want to say this so that you can help those who believe that morality is purely casuistic,” he said, meaning a morality that changes according to particular cases and circumstances rather than one that determines a general approach that should guide the church’s pastoral activity.  [Go back and read that again.  Slowly.  I have to scratch my head a little, because, as it seems to me, if I am not mistaken, there are those who read Amoris as saying that each case must be considered individually and that different outcomes can result in individual cases, such as in the cases of those who are civilly divorced and remarried being admitted, maybe, to Holy Communion.  Wouldn’t that be “casuistic”.  On the other hand, those who are seeking greater clarity about the controversial elements of Amoris, if I am not mistaken, hold that there is a general principle which cannot be abandoned in individual cases.  So, how is it again that we are to “help those who believe that morality is purely casuistic”?  Does the meaning of that phrase depend on the word “purely”?]

The pope had made a similar point during his meeting with Jesuits gathered in Rome for their general congregation in 2016. There he said, “In the field of morality, we must advance without falling into situationalism.

“St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure affirm that the general principle holds for all but — they say it explicitly — as one moves to the particular, the question becomes diversified and many nuances arise without changing the principle,” he had said. It is a method that was used for the Catechism of the Catholic Church [?] and “Amoris Laetitia,” he added.  [I need a sound Thomist to help me out with that.  It sounds as if the principle of non-contradiction is in play here, but I could be wrong.  If a “general principle” can be turned 180° through nuances, then… is it a general principle?]

“It is evident that, in the field of morality, one must proceed with scientific rigour and with love for the church and discernment. [With “scientific rigor”… as in a, say, “laboratory”?] There are certain points of morality on which only in prayer can one have sufficient light to continue reflecting theologically. And on this, allow me to repeat it, one must do ‘theology on one’s knees.’ You cannot do theology without prayer. This is a key point and it must be done this way,” he had told the Jesuits in Rome.

I’ll have to pray on this for a while.

The moderation queue is ON.

Aquinas_Amoris

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, The Drill | Tagged
39 Comments