This essay is not an incitement to hate Pope Francis. Rather, in an inadequate way, and albeit with a hint of frustration and with more than just a little (hopefully righteous) indignation attached to certain phrases, this essay attempts to sum up and echo the heart of the concern many, many, many people have about the unsettling goings on in the Church.
CARDINAL: Old English, from Latin cardinalis, from cardo, cardin- ‘hinge.’
Cardinal Cupich is Mistaken: Synod Fathers Did Reject Communion for Remarried Divorcees
Critics argue that to say two-thirds of synod fathers supported the proposition is therefore very misleading.
Edward PentinCardinal Blase Cupich of Chicago fielded about half a dozen questions from reporters after Pope Francis elevated him to the College of Cardinals on Saturday.
A question I asked him was about the Dubia, the five doubts about Amoris Laetitia that four cardinals have sent to the Pope to ascertain whether some of the most controversial passages are consistent with Church teaching.
Although the Dubia questions ask for a simple “yes” or “no” answer on whether previous magisterial teachings, particularly of Pope St. John Paul II, are still valid in light of these passages, the Holy Father has decided not to respond, nor requested to meet the cardinals to specifically discuss their concerns. READ MORE HERE
An exhortation, if it be orthodox, can easily withstand the test of comparison to the teaching of Christ—you know, that pesky thing called divine revelation which an exhortation surely and precisely should reflect. Just because something has been inked by a pope does not automatically make it magisterial. Pope Benedict XVI reminded us about the varied characters of papal writings by identifying when his own writings, his books for example, were theological reflections with which anyone was free to disagree, and when his writings were the voice of the Office of Peter which required the faithful Catholic's allegiance.
Cardinal Cupich—spare us your sanctimonious attitude. Your rise in the Church is a testament to the careerism that Pope Benedict (and Francis) condemned on several occasions.
The four Cardinals who issued their dubia have legitimately asked for a clarification, nothing more. Amoris Laetitia is not as beyond criticism as the scarlet pumpernickel Cardinal Cupich thinks it to be.
I think that if you begin to question the legitimacy or what is being said in such a document, do you throw into question then all the other documents that have been issued before by the other popes. So I think it’s not for the pope to respond to that, it’s a moment for anyone who has doubts to examine how they got to that position because it is a magisterial document of the Catholic Church. [S]
What is that ("rigid") teaching of Jesus that seems to be a cause of cognitive dissonance for Francis, et al?
And (Jesus) said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”—St. Mark 10:11-12.Got a problem with that teaching? Talk to Jesus—the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity—about it.
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. Pope Francis makes clear, from the beginning, that the post-synodal apostolic exhortation is not an act of the magisterium (3). (Got that, Cardinal Cupich?) The very form of the document confirms the same. It is written as a reflection of the Holy Father on the work of the last two sessions of the Synod of Bishops. For instance, in Chapter Eight, which some wish to interpret as the proposal of a new discipline with obvious implications for the Church’s doctrine, Pope Francis, citing his post-synodal apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, declares:I understand those who prefer a more rigorous pastoral care which leaves no room for confusion. But I sincerely believe that Jesus wants a Church attentive to the goodness which the Holy Spirit sows in the midst of human weakness, a Mother who, while clearly expressing her objective teaching, “always does what good she can, even if in the process her shoes get soiled by the mud of the street” (308). (It is entirely possible to love people AND, without sacrificing Truth, call people to conversion to the Gospel and Person of Jesus Christ. Saint Teresa of Calcutta (Mother Teresa) did a pretty good job of that, don't cha think?)
In other words, the Holy Father is proposing what he personally believes is the will of Christ for his Church, but he does not intend to impose his point of view, nor to condemn those who insist on what he calls “a more rigorous pastoral care.” The personal, that is, non-magisterial, nature of the document is also evident in the fact that the references cited are principally the final report of the 2015 session of the Synod of Bishops and the addresses and homilies of Pope Francis himself. There is no consistent effort to relate the text, in general, or these citations to the magisterium, the Fathers of the Church and other proven authors. [S]
If there is anything positive to be gleaned from the events of the past few years, it would be that the exposure of those who promote heterodoxy indicates that God is tidying up His Church. If internet conversations of late and an abundance of erudite articles by respected authors from the past few decades are any indication, perhaps we are seeing the innumerable prayers for relief from cafeteria (c)atholicism being answered. Having permitted priests and bishops enough rope to hang themselves on the gallows of heresy, God may very well be weeding His flock by allowing the cafeteria types to expose themselves and their misdoings. God's promise to protect the Church must guide our thoughts and prayers lest we take delight in the exposure (and, post-death, the likely harsh judgement) of our erring brethren. If any men need God's mercy, surely it must be those rebellious red hats and purple clad hierarchs who have no idea that their bad behaviour and goofy teaching has contributed to the emptying of pews and the pollution of minds.
“The entire Church has always (Quod Ubique, Semper, et Ab Omnibus) firmly held that one may not receive communion with the knowledge of being in a state of mortal sin, a principle recalled as definitive by John Paul II in his 2003 encyclical ‘Ecclesia de Eucharistia,’” said the prefect. “Not even a pope can dispense from such a divine law.”
With confusion rampant even among the clergy about Pope Francis’ own stance regarding communion for those in grave sin,... Cardinal Sarah’s statements come at a critical moment. [S]