Comments from the Remnant Newspaper : Amoris Laetitia: Anatomy of a Pontifical Débâcle
Notung:
But I think what you are saying is implicit in the general criticism of AL's subjectivism. None of us has the power to "discern" whether someone in an objective state of sin is actually in a state of grace due to invincible ignorance or some other cause, even if we admit the theoretical existence of such situation; therefore, we should act as if that hypothetical state of grace does not exist, since there is no certainty of salvation and the risk is too serious..Lionel:
Yes!
'...AL's subjectivism. None of us has the power to "discern" whether someone in an objective state of sin is actually in a state of grace due to invincible ignorance or some other cause, even if we admit the theoretical existence of such situation;...'
But I think what you are saying is implicit in the general criticism of AL's subjectivism. None of us has the power to "discern" whether someone in an objective state of sin is actually in a state of grace due to invincible ignorance or some other cause, even if we admit the theoretical existence of such situation; therefore, we should act as if that hypothetical state of grace does not exist, since there is no certainty of salvation and the risk is too serious..Lionel:
Yes!
'...AL's subjectivism. None of us has the power to "discern" whether someone in an objective state of sin is actually in a state of grace due to invincible ignorance or some other cause, even if we admit the theoretical existence of such situation;...'
Yet in the new moral theology it is assumed that we humans can discern whether someone in objective sin is not really in mortal sin because of some subjective factor or a hypothetical theory.
This is the moral theology accepted by Cardinal Raymond Burke.
He says:-
The only key to the correct interpretation of Amoris Laetitia is the constant teaching of the Church and her discipline that safeguards and fosters this teaching...
In other words, a post-synodal apostolic exhortation, by its very nature, does not propose new doctrine and discipline, but applies the perennial doctrine and discipline to the situation of the world at the time.- Cardinal Raymond Burke, ‘Amoris Laetitia’ and the Constant Teaching and Practice of the Church, National Catholic Register
The only key to the correct interpretation of Amoris Laetitia is the constant teaching of the Church and her discipline that safeguards and fosters this teaching...
In other words, a post-synodal apostolic exhortation, by its very nature, does not propose new doctrine and discipline, but applies the perennial doctrine and discipline to the situation of the world at the time.- Cardinal Raymond Burke, ‘Amoris Laetitia’ and the Constant Teaching and Practice of the Church, National Catholic Register
Cardinal Burke does not have a problem with Amoris Laetitia N.301.
He does not even have a problem with magisterial documents suggesting that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, refer to known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as interpreted by Fr.Leonard Feeney and the 16th century Jesuit missionaries.Hypothetical cases are objective exceptions! Pope Benedict in the interview published in Avvenire calls this 'a development of doctrine'.
Cardinal Burke accepts the 'contemporary official magisterium' as does Joseph Shaw, professor of theology at Oxford University.He does not consider Amoris Laetita heretical, since he and Cardinal Burke are also using a heretical moral theology.
They assume there are known exceptions to the traditional interpretation of mortal sin and then accept AL 301 as referring to a general rule, a new doctrine and discipline.
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment