Roman Curial Cardinal Cordes on "Amoris Laetitia": There arises the risk of abuse of the statements, if they do not remain anchored in word and spirit of the whole letter, but are singled out and are quoted selectively
Rome (kath.net) "The Papal Letter (Amoris Laetitia) is in the continuity of a long standing conception and teaching. It recalls the Second Vatican Council ("Gaudium et Spes"), the encyclical of Pope Paul VI."Humanae Vitae", the "theology of the body" - presented by John Paul II -., referring to the encyclical of Pope Benedict XVI "God is love" The German Cardinal Paul Josef Cordes explains this in an interview with the "Daily Mail"... Cordes sees the writing as a compendium of the Marriage and Family Pastoral which can truly give a fresh impulse.
On the question of the newspaper, whether the Pope did not go too far in two footnotes (336 and 351) relating to sections 300 and 305 of "Amoris Laetitia," the cardinal explained that with the careful reading of the document it comes to light that the pope wants to address any and all of the needs of even the most complex cases. This leads, according to Cordes, then "occasionally to very subtle arguments," such as the "conscience" or a "special situation".
The Cardinal then stated: "So the risk of misuse of his statements arise when they do not remain anchored around the letter in word and spirit -- are just singled out and quoted selectively. This is also with the reallocation of the problem to the secrecy of the confessional, can not be found as 'a loophole of mercy' -- as it was called for at the Synod of the German Bishops in Würzburg 1975."
According to Cordes, should the consideration of a particular case, according to "Amoris Laetitia"(no. 300) "this discernment can never prescind from the Gospel demands of truth and charity, as proposed by the Church". The Pope himself explicitly warned against this connection that the Church would represent a "double standard." The corresponding footnotes, says the Cardinal, must be seen "in light of theological basic orientation" such as the Council of Trent (Canon 7) or the first Post-synodal letter to the family.
"Divorced and remarried faithful 'stand in the way, in so far as allowance (i.e., the Eucharist reception), since their state of life and their living conditions are in objective contradiction to every covenant of love between Christ and the Church, which the Eucharist makes visible and present'(Familiaris consortio No. 84)." This sentence from Familiaris Consortio can not be archived. For it was John Paul II. who the Catholic Church owes for the systematic reflection on this subject. Last but not least, according to Cordes. this Pope as a saint, a witness to the truth of the highest authority.
Link to Kath.net...
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Edit: at least he's not like Father Longenecker who uses it as an opportunity to attack real Catholics who are legitimately scandalized. He actually comes to the table with a rational account.
AMDG
4 comments:
Help! Help! And again I say: HELP!
Lord God, please save your Holy Church from Pope Francis. Amen.
That is a risk Francis welcomes and seems to desire, for his intention is clear from his collective actions and words: the same dishonest trickery that worked with liturgical abuses (read Communion in the hand, extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist, etc.) is at work here---present something as an exception (a case-by-case on some "path," the give-away term for radical change in liberal and modernist lingo) and then let the exceptions become the rule. First it was the liturgy, then doctrine (as in the ecumenical distortions of the doctrine that the Catholic Faith is needed for salvation), and now it is the turn for the revision of morals, done ever so gradually. What we have is a complete revolution that attacks the very nature of the Faith in doctrine, morals and liturgy---and those who say that nothing is really changed are either liars, fools, delusional or a little bit of all. In any case, they are accomplices of the Modernists and will have to answer to God for their betrayal of their Mother the Church in her gravest hour of need. In the meantime, many faithful Catholics remain shackled by the distortion of Catholic teaching about the Petrine office otherwise and rightly known as papolatry. How right Shakespeare was: "Lilies that fester smell far worse than weeds." Edward
This state of affairs has been tolerated on the parish level for more than fifty years. There was once a time when it was only a few strange parishes that had this approach, but not it's the other way around where there are only a few traditional parishes in a diocese which assert and attempt to follow through on the proper teaching.
Who knew that this would be their leading point of attack back before Benedict XVI. resigned when Andrea Tornielli, who'd been hitherto considered a reliable vaticanist, began to show his true "We Are Church" sensibilities?
This is Tornielli at Vatican Downslider back in 2012:
http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2012/02/why-is-catholic-insider-supporting.html
If Cardinal Cordes interpretation is true then Why bother mentioning 'special cases at all ? If I read correctly he is saying there are no exceptions where practise can contradict doctrine. So the question needs to be asked why mention special cases ?
Post a Comment