Saturday, April 9, 2016

Heresy in Amoris Latitiae ?

Furthermore, in this case, as with a myriad of other cases over the last half century, we are not in a situation of a Pope explicitly teaching heresy. We can say whatever we like about how he should have been clearer, should have reiterated this or that teaching: perhaps he should. But he is not publicly and explicitly teaching heresy. This is important; it makes a big difference. Popes can teach heresy, they are not protected from doing that except under very specific conditions, and it has happened more than once in the history of the Church.-Joseph Shaw 
http://www.lmschairman.org/2016/04/amoris-laetitia-preliminary-conclusion.html

In the previous blog post 1 I mentioned that 'Catholics are not aware of the false premise and inference in the liberal moral and salvation theology of the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1992).It is now expressed in Amoris Latitiae (AL).'

Pope Francis uses the irrational premise and inference in his moral and salvation theology and so does Pope Benedict. They use an irrationality to change traditional teachings on morals and faith( salvation).

The pope cannot say that any particular couple  living together will  not be deprived of sanctifying grace and so will not go to Hell.He cannot say that any such couple who died immediately would not go to Hell. There is no way he could know. There is no way a pastor or confessor would know that a couple living together is not on the way to Hell.

When AL puts forward  theoretical situations which suggest that there could be 'exceptions' this is false.There is no way that we humans can say that a couple is  not on the way to Hell or is an ' exception', to the orientation towards Hell for living in mortal sin.Mortal sin is always objective and there cannot be a known exception of a couple who will not go to Hell unless they change their lifestyle and receive absolution in the Confessional.
This is the teaching of the Church to avoid Hell and it is not just some 'rule'.

By assuming hypothetical cases are known exceptions to the teaching on concubinage and mortal sin the pope has discarded traditional doctrine.He has rejected the teaching on mortal sin and  concubinage and that too with an irrationality.

AL says  Hence it is (sic) can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace." (#301).

This is heresy.

I  mentioned in a previous post how hypothetical cases are assumed to be explicit, personally known.Then these invisible  cases are inferred to be known exceptions to the moral teachings of the Church. 
Similarly there are hypothetical cases which are assumed to be explicit and personally known to be exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla  salus(EENS)  as it was interpreted in the 16th century. This too is heresy.
When hypothetical cases are assumed to be known exceptions to the dogma EENS we have a change in our understanding of the Nicene Creed and the Athanasius Creed.
We are dealing with the stuff of heresy, first class heresy in the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II.
AL says  Hence it is (sic) can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace." (#301).
Theologically, the pope is saying that there are known exceptions to the traditional teachings on adultery, concubinage and mortal sin - and we know he cannot know of any exception.
How can there be known exceptions? Yet throughout AL there are references to these exceptions as if they are personaly known cases of couples who will not go to Hell.
If it is said that this was the reasoning in the Catechism then it is irrationality and heresy there too. How can it be possible for us human beings to know of  exceptions to the traditional teachings on morals and faith ? This is irrational, non traditional and heretical.-Lionel Andrades



1
The precise trick: how it was applied in the Exhortation Amoris Laetitia
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/the-precise-trick-how-it-was-applied-in.html

The precise trick: how it was applied in the Exhortation Amoris Laetitia

Catholics are not aware of the false premise and inference in the liberal moral and salvation theology of the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1992).It is now expressed in Amoris Latitiae.
This is how the 'trick' works. 
Image result for Photo of someone laughing
MORAL THEOLOGY
At first hypothetical cases are mentioned.Possible exceptions to the traditional moral teachings of the Church based on the 10 Commandments and the Gospels.
This is harmless speculation.There is no problem here.
Then it is presumed that these speculative cases are explicit.It is presumed that they are references to persons personally known in the present times.
Then it is presumed that these 'invisible but explicit cases' are known in general.They are known in the present times e.g 1960-2016.
So we have a premise: hypothetical cases are explicit and generally known in the present times.
Then comes the deadly inference.
They are exceptions to the traditional moral teachings of the Catholic Church.
So the new moral theology indicates that an un-married couple  living together could be in sin but we cannot judge them.Since there could be exceptions.
Where are the exceptions one may ask? There really are none.Since humanly speaking, in general, we cannot know of exceptions.
With this error we get the strange 'permutations and  possibilities' taught in moral theology at pontifical universities.
We also have the three conditions for mortal sin mentioned in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Image result for photos of Pope's new document being announced releasedSo now the Exhortation Amoris Laetititae says Hence it is (sic) can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace." (#301).
The same ruse was used to eliminate the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
Image result for Photo of someone laughing
SALVATION THEOLOGY
Hypothetical cases are assumed to be explicit.The hypothetical cases mentioned are the baptism of desire and blood without the baptism of water and being saved in invincible ignorance (without faith and baptism).It is speculated that there could be possible exceptions to EENS in certain circumstances.This is harmless speculation.It is theoretical reasoning with good will.
Then it is presumed that these speculative cases are explicit, objectively seen. It is presumed that these cases are references to persons personally known in the present times.
So we have a premise : Hypothetical cases are explicit and generally known in the present times.
Then comes the deadly inference.
They are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
They are exceptions to the dogma EENS, to the Bible ( John 3.5,Mark 16:16),the Nicene Creed ( I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins), the Athanasius Creed ( outside the Church there is no salvation)...
So every one does not need to be  a ' card carrying member' of the Church, it is said.Catholic salvation theology (soteriology) has been changed. So the Church's understanding of itself (ecclesiology) has also been changed. Our understanding of Christ( Christology) with reference to the Church has also been changed.
So the new theology says that when I meet a Hindu, Jew or Muslim, I cannot say that he is oriented to the fires of Hell ( as it was said in the 16th century), since he could be an exception( known).
Do you see the pattern?
Where are the exceptions you may ask? There are none!There are none since humanly speaking, in general, we cannot know of any exception.
So with this error in reasoning we have the Catechism of the Catholic Church ( CCC 1257)  saying God is not limited to the Sacraments ( as if this is something concrete and known in general for us).We have to read CCC 846 telling us all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church( since the baptism of desire etc refer to concrete cases, explicitly known, objectively seen on earth).CCC 846 on outside the Church there is no salvation cannot say that every one needs to be a formal member of the Church. It cannot say that the reference is to a dogma.Instead it calls the dogma an 'aphorism'.
Image result for Photo of someone amusedThis 'trick' was originally used in the Baltimore Catechism when it was assumed that there were known cases, in general, of a catechumen  who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it.So because of this 'explicit' case known in general  it was said the desire for the baptism of water, was a baptism, like the baptism of water.It had the same result( as if someone knew of a particular case in the present times) and it was in every way like the baptism of water ( as if someone could administer it and physically see it like the baptism of water).
Now Pope Francis assumes there are explicit and known in general, exceptions to the traditional teaching on adultery and concubinage.
Image result for Photo of someone amusedSo he says: '  Hence it is(sic) can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace." (#301).
For him,and for Pope Benedict, the exception ( visible and general on earth) changes the rule ( on concubinage always being a mortal sin).-Lionel Andrades

Amoris Laetitiae reflects the confusion and contradictions of the Catechism's liberal moral theology http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/amoris-laetitiae-reflects-confusion-and.html


Related image

Contradicts Pope John Paul II ? : Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/contradicts-pope-john-paul-ii.html