It is disconcerting to see the Second Vatican Council, an ecumenical council of the Catholic Church, listed alongside Modernism, a pernicious heresy, as if both could have been contributors to our present woes.
Italian historian Professor Roberto de Mattei was interviewed over at OnePeterFive. The professor musters some evidence for his interpretation of recent ecclesiastical events but some alternatives to his interpretations seem reasonable, too. I’ll mention a few here.
De Mattei: “The present crisis in the Church did not originate with Pope Francis, and it is not focused in one single person; rather, it dates back to the Second Vatican Council, and, going back even further, to the Modernist Crisis [of the early twentieth century]”.
Perhaps that came out wrongly, but it is disconcerting to see the Second Vatican Council, an ecumenical council of the Catholic Church, listed alongside Modernism, a pernicious heresy, as if both could have been contributors to our present woes. Ignorance, even betrayal, of conciliar teachings by many of those responsible for its implementation is not the fault of a council, and an ecumenical council should not be listed alongside a heresy as a possible source of disaster.
De Mattei: “The fact that the guidelines of the Argentine bishops and the approval of the Pope have been published in AAS has made it official that ‘no other interpretations are possible’ of Amoris Laetitia other than that of the Argentine bishops, which authorizes communion to be given to those divorced and remarried people who are in an objective state of mortal sin. The letter was private, but the publication in AAS transforms the position of Pope Francis into an act of the Magisterium.”
This is simply wrong, and at several levels.
First, content and authorship of ecclesiastical assertions are crucial—crucial—in assessing what counts, and what does not count, as “magisterial”.
At the risk of over-simplifying, the great majority of “magisterial” assertions convey doctrine not discipline (however much disciplinary provisions might serve doctrinal values, they themselves are rarely doctrinal—thus ‘magisterial’—in nature). Now, the Buenos Aires directives do offer some doctrinal assertions (mostly aspirational, vague, and excessively wordy) that in my view are either sound or at least cannot be proven as heterodox, and they offer some disciplinarypoints that, again, are either sound or do not directly contradict Canon 915 (see below).
Second, the publication in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis of a dicastery official’s memo about what a pope apparently told him about one of that pope’s letters to a group of bishops concerning a document that the bishops had written does not transform said memo or pope’s letter or bishops’ statement into “magisterial acts” no matter what labels might later be attached to them. In the interest of time, let’s just focus on the weight to be accorded the Argentine’s document itself.
Moreover, sub-groupings of episcopal conferences cannot, under any circumstances, carry out acts of “authentic magisterium”, as John Paul II made clear in Apostolos, Comp. Norm 2: “No body of the Episcopal Conference, outside of the plenary assembly, has the power to carry out acts of authentic magisterium. The Episcopal Conference cannot grant such power to its Commissions or other bodies set up by it.”
I see, in other words, no “magisterial act” from an episcopal conference that could be ‘re-magisterialized’ in the first place or ‘magisterialized’ by the several-steps-removed publication process outlined above.
(By the way, this whole notion that publication in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis means something is “magisterial” and/or that basically nothing is ecclesiastically important unless it appears in the AAS will not survive two minutes’ reflection. Great swaths of material in the AAS have nothing whatsoever to do with magisterium, and boatloads of, say, John Paul II’s magisterium never appeared in the AAS (e.g., most of his Wednesday addresses on Theology of the Body); moreover, some important Church documents took effect in virtue of their publication in, say, L’Osservatore Romano (e.g., CDF penal decree of 2008 against attempting the ordination of women) or even in Roman academic journals (the tribunal instruction Dignitas connubii of 2005). So, yes, the AAS is important (Canon 8), but it is not the only show in Rome.)
Third, no matter what theory might find some kind of ‘magisterium’ operative in the Argentine’s document or in the pope’s endorsement of it, the simple fact remains that neither the Argentines nor the pope has ever directly said that civilly-divorced-and-remarried Catholics may (outside of the narrow application of the internal forum option known as “brother-sister”) be administered holy Communion in disregard of the divinely-rooted and pontifically legislatedprohibition against such administration set forth in, among many other places, 1983 CIC 915 and CCEO 712. As far as I can see, the Buenos Aires directives never quite confirm what Amoris laetitia never quite says. It is a situation ripe, of course, for exploitation by those bent on avoiding, among other things, the implications of Our Lord’s teaching on the permanence of marriage, which brings me to my next point.
De Mattei: “The line of thinking of those cardinals, bishops, and theologians, [and canon lawyers] who maintain that it is possible to interpret Amoris Laetitia in continuity with Familiaris Consortio 84 and other documents of the Magisterium has been reduced to dust.”
I strongly disagree with de Mattei’s bleak assessment of the state of this debate and I say that as one who has steadily opposed the implementations of Amoris being wrought by, say the bishops of Malta and German episcopal conference committee. The point, as I see it, is not whether these bishops are implementing Francis’s “desires” (I have no window into the pope’s intentions, so how would I know?), the question is whether they are applying his words, and I say, they are not applying his actual words.
De Mattei: “Amoris Laetitia is a document which serves as a litmus test: it must be either accepted or rejected in toto.”
How can anyone make such a stark, all-or-nothing claim about a +50,000 word document so replete with pastoral insights, tiresome platitudes, scholarly applications and embarrassing misappropriations, and clever insights, as is Amoris?
Reasonable minds should “examine everything, and keep what is good.”
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Edward N. Peters, JD, JCD has doctoral degrees in canon and common law. Since 2005 he has held the Edmund Cardinal Szoka Chair at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit. His personal blog on canon law issues in the news may be accessed at the "In the Light of the Law" site.
Pope Francis participates in Mass on the solemnity of Pentecost, May 19, 2024 / Daniel Ibanez/CNA
Rome Newsroom, May 19, 2024 / 08:15 am (CNA).
On the solemnity of Pentecost, Pope Francis said that Christians are called to proclaim the Gospel t… […]
Pope Francis at the general audience in St. Peter’s Square, Oct. 5, 2016. / Credit: Daniel Ibanez/CNA
CNA Staff, Mar 13, 2024 / 12:00 pm (CNA).
March 13 marks the anniversary of the election of Pope Francis as the 266th successor of St. Peter. Here is a timeline of key events during his papacy:
2013
March 13 — About two weeks after Pope Benedict XVI steps down from the papacy, Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio is elected pope. He takes the papal name Francis in honor of St. Francis of Assisi and proclaims from the central balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica: “Let us begin this journey, the bishop and people, this journey of the Church of Rome, which presides in charity over all the Churches, a journey of brotherhood in love, of mutual trust. Let us always pray for one another.”
March 14 — The day after he begins his pontificate, Pope Francis returns to his hotel to personally pay his hotel bill and collect his luggage.
July 8 — Pope Francis visits Italy’s island of Lampedusa and meets with a group of 50 migrants, most of whom are young men from Somalia and Eritrea. The island, which is about 200 miles off the coast of Tunisia, is a common entry point for migrants who flee parts of Africa and the Middle East to enter Europe. This is the pope’s first pastoral visit outside of Rome and sets the stage for making reaching out to the peripheries a significant focus.
Pope Francis gives the Wednesday general audience in St. Peter’s Square on Oct. 2, 2013. Elise Harris/CNA.
July 23-28 — Pope Francis visits Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, to participate in World Youth Day 2013. More than 3 million people from around the world attend the event.
July 29 — On the return flight from Brazil, Pope Francis gives his first papal news conference and sparks controversy by saying “if a person is gay and seeks God and has goodwill, who am I to judge?” The phrase is prompted by a reporter asking the pope a question about priests who have homosexual attraction.
Nov. 24 — Pope Francis publishes his first apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (The Joy of the Gospel). The document illustrates the pope’s vision for how to approach evangelization in the modern world.
2014
Feb. 22 — Pope Francis holds his first papal consistory to appoint 19 new cardinals, including ones from countries in the developing world that have never previously been represented in the College of Cardinals, such as Haiti.
March 22 — Pope Francis creates the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors. The commission works to protect the dignity of minors and vulnerable adults, such as the victims of sexual abuse.
Pope Francis greets pilgrims during his general audience on Nov. 29, 2014. Bohumil Petrik/CNA.
Oct. 5 — The Synod on the Family begins. The bishops discuss a variety of concerns, including single-parent homes, cohabitation, homosexual adoption of children, and interreligious marriages.
Dec. 6 — After facing some pushback for his efforts to reform the Roman Curia, Pope Francis discusses his opinion in an interview with La Nacion, an Argentine news outlet: “Resistance is now evident. And that is a good sign for me, getting the resistance out into the open, no stealthy mumbling when there is disagreement. It’s healthy to get things out into the open, it’s very healthy.”
2015
Jan. 18 — To conclude a trip to Asia, Pope Francis celebrates Mass in Manila, Philippines. Approximately 6 million to 7 million people attend the record-setting Mass, despite heavy rain.
March 23 — Pope Francis visits Naples, Italy, to show the Church’s commitment to helping the fight against corruption and organized crime in the city.
May 24 — To emphasize the Church’s mission to combat global warming and care for the environment, Pope Francis publishes the encyclical Laudato Si’, which urges people to take care of the environment and encourages political action to address climate problems.
Pope Francis at a Wednesday general audience in St. Peter’s Square on June 17, 2015. Bohumil Petrik.
Sept. 19-22 — Pope Francis visits Cuba and meets with Fidel Castro in the first papal visit to the country since Pope John Paul II in 1998. During his homily, Francis discusses the dignity of the human person: “Being a Christian entails promoting the dignity of our brothers and sisters, fighting for it, living for it.”
Sept. 22-27 — After departing from Cuba, Pope Francis makes his first papal visit to the United States. In Washington, D.C., he speaks to a joint session of Congress, in which he urges lawmakers to work toward promoting the common good, and canonizes the Franciscan missionary St. Junípero Serra. He also attends the World Meeting of Families in Philadelphia, which focuses on celebrating the gift of the family.
Pope Francis speaks to the U.S. Congress in Washington, D.C. on Sept. 24, 2015. . L’Osservatore Romano.
Oct. 4 — Pope Francis begins the second Synod on the Family to address issues within the modern family, such as single-parent homes, cohabitation, poverty, and abuse.
Oct. 18 — The pope canonizes St. Louis Martin and St. Marie-Azélie “Zelie” Guérin. The married couple were parents to five nuns, including St. Therese of Lisieux. They are the first married couple to be canonized together.
Dec. 8 — Pope Francis’ Jubilee Year of Mercy begins. The year focuses on God’s mercy and forgiveness and people’s redemption from sin. The pope delegates certain priests in each diocese to be Missionaries of Mercy who have the authority to forgive sins that are usually reserved for the Holy See.
2016
March 19 — Pope Francis publishes the apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, which discusses a wide variety of issues facing the modern family based on discussions from the two synods on the family. The pope garners significant controversy from within the Church for comments he makes in Chapter 8 about Communion for the divorced and remarried.
April 16 — After visiting refugees on the Greek island of Lesbos, Pope Francis allows three Muslim refugee families to join him on his flight back to Rome. He says the move was not a political statement.
Pope Francis at the General Audience in St. Peter’s Square, Feb. 24, 2016. Daniel Ibanez/CNA.
July 26-31 — Pope Francis visits Krakow, Poland, as part of the World Youth Day festivities. About 3 million young Catholic pilgrims from around the world attend.
Sept. 4 — The pope canonizes St. Teresa of Calcutta, who is also known as Mother Teresa. The saint, a nun from Albania, dedicated her life to missionary and charity work, primarily in India.
Sept. 30-Oct. 2 — Pope Francis visits Georgia and Azerbaijan on his 16th trip outside of Rome since the start of his papacy. His trip focuses on Catholic relations with Orthodox Christians and Muslims.
Oct. 4 — Pope Francis makes a surprise visit to Amatrice, Italy, to pray for the victims of an earthquake in central Italy that killed nearly 300 people.
2017
May 12-13 — In another papal trip, Francis travels to Fatima, Portugal, to visit the Shrine of Our Lady of Fatima. May 13 marks the 100th anniversary of the first Marian apparition to three children in the city.
July 11 — Pope Francis adds another category of Christian life suitable for the consideration of sainthood: “offering of life.” The category is distinct from martyrdom, which only applies to someone who is killed for his or her faith. The new category applies to those who died prematurely through an offering of their life to God and neighbor.
Pope Francis greets a participant in the World Day of the Poor in Rome, Nov. 16, 2017. L’Osservatore Romano.
Nov. 19 — On the first-ever World Day of the Poor, Pope Francis eats lunch with 4,000 poor and people in need in Rome.
Nov. 27-Dec. 2 — In another trip to Asia, Pope Francis travels to Myanmar and Bangladesh. He visits landmarks and meets with government officials, Catholic clergy, and Buddhist monks. He also preaches the Gospel and promotes peace in the region.
2018
Jan. 15-21 — The pope takes another trip to Latin America, this time visiting Chile and Peru. The pontiff meets with government officials and members of the clergy while urging the faithful to remain close to the clergy and reject secularism. The Chilean visit leads to controversy over Chilean clergy sex abuse scandals.
Aug. 2 — The Vatican formally revises No. 2267 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which concerns the death penalty. The previous text suggested the death penalty could be permissible in certain circumstances, but the revision states that the death penalty is “inadmissible.”
Aug. 25 — Archbishop Carlo Viganò, former papal nuncio to the United States, publishes an 11-page letter calling for the resignation of Pope Francis and accusing him and other Vatican officials of covering up sexual abuse including allegations against former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick. The pope initially does not directly respond to the letter, but nine months after its publication he denies having prior knowledge about McCarrick’s conduct.
Aug. 25-26 — Pope Francis visits Dublin, Ireland, to attend the World Meeting of Families. The theme is “the Gospel of family, joy for the world.”
Pope Francis at the 2018 World Meeting of Families in Ireland. Daniel Ibanez/CNA.
Oct. 3-28 — The Synod on Young People, the Faith, and Vocational Discernment takes place. The synod focuses on best practices to teach the faith to young people and to help them discern God’s will.
2019
Jan. 22-27 — The third World Youth Day during Pope Francis’ pontificate takes place during these six days in Panama City, Panama. Young Catholics from around the world gather for the event, with approximately 3 million people in attendance.
Feb. 4 — Pope Francis signs a joint document in with Sheikh Ahmed el-Tayeb, the grand imam of Al-Azhar, in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, titled the “Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together.” The document focuses on people of different faiths uniting together to live peacefully and advance a culture of mutual respect.
Pope Francis and Ahmed el-Tayeb, grand imam of al-Azhar, signed a joint declaration on human fraternity during an interreligious meeting in Abu Dhabi, UAE, Feb. 4, 2019. Vatican Media.
Feb. 21-24 — The Meeting on the Protection of Minors in the Church, which is labeled the Vatican Sexual Abuse Summit, takes place. The meeting focuses on sexual abuse scandals in the Church and emphasizes responsibility, accountability, and transparency.
Oct. 6-27 — The Church holds the Synod of Bishops for the Pan-Amazon region, which is also known as the Amazon Synod. The synod is meant to present ways in which the Church can better evangelize the Amazon region but leads to controversy when carved images of a pregnant Amazonian woman, referred to by the pope as Pachamama, are used in several events and displayed in a basilica near the Vatican.
Oct. 13 — St. John Henry Newman, an Anglican convert to Catholicism and a cardinal, is canonized by Pope Francis. Newman’s writings inspired Catholic student associations at nonreligious colleges and universities in the United States and other countries.
2020
March 15 — Pope Francis takes a walking pilgrimage in Rome to the chapel of the crucifix and prays for an end to the COVID-19 pandemic. The crucifix was carried through Rome during the plague of 1522.
March 27 — Pope Francis gives an extraordinary “urbi et orbi” blessing in an empty and rain-covered St. Peter’s Square, praying for the world during the coronavirus pandemic.
Pope Francis venerates the miraculous crucifix of San Marcello al Corso in St. Peter’s Square during his Urbi et Orbi blessing, March 27, 2020. Vatican Media.
2021
March 5-8 — In his first papal trip since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Pope Francis becomes the first pope to visit Iraq. On his trip, he signs a joint statement with Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani condemning extremism and promoting peace.
July 3 — Cardinal Giovanni Angelo Becciu, who was elevated to the College of Cardinals by Pope Francis, is indicted in a Vatican court for embezzlement, money laundering, and other crimes. The pope gives approval for the indictment.
July 4 — Pope Francis undergoes colon surgery for diverticulitis, a common condition in older people. The Vatican releases a statement that assures the pope “reacted well” to the surgery. Francis is released from the hospital after 10 days.
July 16 — Pope Francis issues a motu proprio titled Traditionis Custodes. The document imposes heavy restrictions on the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass.
Dec. 2-6 — The pope travels to Cyprus and Greece. The trip includes another visit to the Greek island of Lesbos to meet with migrants.
Pope Francis greets His Beatitude Ieronymos II in Athens, Greece on Dec. 5, 2021. Vatican Media
2022
Jan. 11 — Pope Francis makes a surprise visit to a record store in Rome called StereoSound. The pope, who has an affinity for classical music, blesses the newly renovated store.
March 19 — The pope promulgates Praedicate Evangelium, which reforms the Roman Curia. The reforms emphasize evangelization and establish more opportunities for the laity to be in leadership positions.
May 5 — Pope Francis is seen in a wheelchair for the first time in public and begins to use one more frequently. The pope has been suffering from knee problems for months.
Pope Francis greeted the crowd in a wheelchair at the end of his general audience on Aug. 3, 2022. Daniel Ibanez/CNA
July 24-30 — In his first papal visit to Canada, Pope Francis apologizes for the harsh treatment of the indigenous Canadians, saying many Christians and members of the Catholic Church were complicit.
2023
Jan. 31-Feb. 5 — Pope Francis travels to the Democratic Republic of Congo and South Sudan. During his visit, the pope condemns political violence in the countries and promotes peace. He also participates in an ecumenical prayer service with Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby and Moderator of the Church of Scotland Iain Greenshields.
Pope Francis greets a young boy a Mass in Juba, South Sudan on Feb. 5, 2023. Vatican Media
March 29-April 1 — Pope Francis is hospitalized for a respiratory infection. During his stay at Rome’s Gemelli Hospital, he visits the pediatric cancer ward and baptizes a newborn baby.
April 5 — The pope appears in the Disney documentary “The Pope: Answers,” which is in Spanish, answering six “hot-button” issues from members of Gen Z from various backgrounds. The group discusses immigration, depression, abortion, clergy sexual and psychological abuse, transgenderism, pornography, and loss of faith.
April 28-30 — Pope Francis visits Hungary to meet with government officials, civil society members, bishops, priests, seminarians, Jesuits, consecrated men and women, and pastoral workers. He celebrates Mass on the final day of the trip in Kossuth Lajos Square.
Pope Francis stands on an altar erected outside the Parliament Building in Budapest’s Kossuth Lajos’ Square during a public outdoor Mass on April 30, 2023. Vatican Media
June 7 — The Vatican announces that Pope Francis will undergo abdominal surgery that afternoon under general anesthesia due to a hernia that is causing painful, recurring, and worsening symptoms. In his general audience that morning before the surgery, Francis says he intends to publish an apostolic letter on St. Thérèse of Lisieux, “patroness of the missions,” to mark the 150th anniversary of her birth.
June 15 — After successful surgery and a week of recovery, Pope Francis is released from Gemelli Hospital.
Aug. 2-6 — Pope Francis travels to Lisbon, Portugal, for World Youth Day 2023, taking place from Aug. 1-6. He meets with Church and civil leaders ahead of presiding at the welcoming Mass and Stations of the Cross. He also hears the confessions of several pilgrims. On Aug. 5, he visits the Shrine of Our Lady of Fátima, where he prays the rosary with young people with disabilities. That evening he presides over the vigil and on Sunday, Aug. 6, he celebrates the closing Mass, where he urges the 1.5 million young people present to “be not afraid,” echoing the words of the founder of World Youth Days, St. John Paul II.
Pope Francis waves at the crowd of 1.5 million people who attended the closing Mass of World Youth Day 2023 in Lisbon, Portugal on Aug. 6, 2023. Vatican Media.
Aug. 31-Sept. 4 — Pope Francis travels to Mongolia, the world’s most sparsely populated sovereign country. The trip makes Francis the first pope to visit the Asian country that shares a 2,880-mile border with China, its most significant economic partner. Mongolia has a population of about 1,300 Catholics in a country of more than 3 million people.
Pope Francis meets with local priests and religious of Mongolia, which includes only 25 priests (19 religious and six diocesan), 33 women religious, and one bishop — Cardinal Giorgio Marengo — in Ulaanbaatar’s Cathedral of Sts. Peter and Paul on Sept. 2, 2023. Credit: Vatican Media
Sept. 22-23 — On a two-day trip to Marseille, France, Pope Francis meets with local civil and religious leaders and participates in the Mediterranean Encounter, a gathering of some 120 young people of various creeds with bishops from 30 countries.
Pope Francis asks for a moment of silence at a memorial dedicated to sailors and migrants lost at sea on the first of a two-day visit to Marseille, France, Sept. 22, 2023. A Camargue cross, which comes from the Camargue area of France, represents the three theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity. The three tridents represent faith, the anchor represents hope, and the heart represents charity. Credit: Daniel Ibañez/CNA
Oct. 4-29 — The Vatican hosts the first of two monthlong global assemblies of the Synod on Synodality, initiated by Pope Francis in 2021 to enhance the communion, participation, and mission of the Church. Pope Francis celebrates the closing Mass of the synod at St. Peter’s Basilica on Oct. 29. The second and final global assembly will take place at the Vatican in October 2024.
Pope Francis at the Synod on Synodality’s closing Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica on Oct. 29, 2023. Vatican Media
Nov. 25 — Pope Francis visits the hospital briefly for precautionary testing after coming down with the flu earlier in the day. Although he still participates in scheduled activities, other officials read his prepared remarks. The Vatican on Nov. 28 cancels the pope’s planned Dec. 1–3 trip to Dubai for the COP28 climate conference, where he was scheduled to deliver a speech, due to his illness.
Dec. 18 — The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith issues the declaration Fiducia Supplicans, which authorizes nonliturgical blessings for same-sex couples and couples in “irregular situations.” Various bishops from around the world voice both support for and criticism of the document.
2024
Jan. 4 — Amid widespread backlash to Fiducia Supplicans, Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández, prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, publishes a five-page press release that refers to Fiducia Supplicans as “perennial doctrine” and underlines that pastoral blessings of couples in irregular situations should not be “an endorsement of the life led by those who request them.”
Jan. 14 — Pope Francis for the first time responds publicly to questions about Fiducia Supplicans in an interview on an Italian television show. The pope underlines that “the Lord blesses everyone” and that a blessing is an invitation to enter into a conversation “to see what the road is that the Lord proposes to them.”
Feb. 11 — In a ceremony attended by Argentine president Javier Milei, Pope Francis canonizes María Antonia of St. Joseph — known affectionately in the pope’s home country as “Mama Antula” — in a Mass at St. Peter’s Basilica. The president and the former archbishop of Buenos Aires embrace after the ceremony. Pope Francis, who has not returned to his homeland since becoming pope in 2013, has said he wants to visit Argentina in the second half of this year.
Pope Francis meets with Argentina President Javier Milei in a private audience on Feb. 12, 2024, at the Vatican. Credit: Vatican Media
Feb. 28 — After canceling audiences the previous Saturday and having an aide read his prepared remarks at his Wednesday audience due to a “mild flu,” Pope Francis visits the hospital for diagnostic tests but returns to the Vatican afterward.
March 2 — Despite having an aide read his speech “because of bronchitis,” the pope presides over the inauguration of the 95th Judicial Year of the Vatican City State and maintains a full schedule.
March 13 — Pope Francis celebrates 11 years as Supreme Pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church.
Somehow Peters is not especially reassuring. If it is this hard to figure out what is and is not part of the Magisterium, how is this very different than Protestants invoking an infallible Bible with so many varying interpretations. Vatican II have a foothold to Modernism by its format of highly prolix documents that allowed diverse readings…. much like this papacy.
Hi Joe M. Actually, I am quite reassuring. The norms for navigating these waters are fairly clear at this point, but when those in high places refuse to adhere to them, well, yes, it is hard to figure out what is going on. We do the best we can with the hand we are dealt. Cordially, dr.p.
I really hate using the term, but… the neo-Catholic band marches on.
Of course AL is a litmus test. As Peters’ response suggests, there are some bad parts that we should reject–but what’s wrong with a little leaven?
To use a the words of AL itself, it can no longer simply be said that small errors infect the whole. Leo XIII must have left mercy at the door when he taught: “There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition.”
. I wonder how many very intelligent human beings look into Catholicism and turn away because of this endlessly complex area of what is authoritative…what isn’t….and what might be but authorities vary on that too….where is it printed…how many times did he say it. It seems endless. Two dissenters on Humanae Vitae were periti at Vatican II…one a previously conservative moral theologian, Bernard Haring,….the other Karl Rahner who edited Denzigers Enchiridion Symbolorum which calibrates what’s authoritative. It’s simply off putting…the endless non clarity of the whole topic. Then when no Pope censured either of those two men in their dissent…the fog thickened. We convert often people from the African bush and parts of Asia but are we turning off many educated who see this said area of the doctrinal as endlessly foggy measured by the pedigree of those within the Church who disagree on what is definitive. It seems endless especially when Popes censure virtually no one…unless a writer attacks something mega major like the Trinity…then there’s excommunication.
“Ignorance, even betrayal, of conciliar teachings by many of those responsible for its implementation is not the fault of a council, and an ecumenical council should not be listed alongside a heresy as a possible source of disaster.”
No; but writing the documents of a council so poorly that they permit ignorance and misinterpretation and provide cover for betrayal is the fault of a council. And is a possible source of disaster.
In my experience, 97%+ of Catholics have never read the documents, or even the four Constitutions, of the Council. That even goes for many priests, who spout nonsense about this or that being “of the Council”, even though it’s simply not the case.
I love and admire Dr. Peters, and I know that he is right about Canon Law and authority.
But in practice (I.e. the gaming of the system by Ivereigh’s Team Bergoglio) the gigantic problem is mentioned in para 7: a lot of the content of AL and the associated letters, memos etc etc (and V2 documents) is sound theology and moral teaching, and the other parts “cannot be proven to be heterodox.” And then in a later paragraph – Dr. P states the main problem (I.e. the intention of Ivereigh’s Team Bergoglio): all of this can be exploited.
I must admit that Ivereigh’s Team Bergoglio, and “theologians” like Cdl. Kasper (a Cardinal! is the Church out of its mind?) and Massimo Faggioli et al are post-Catholic. Their “theology” doesn’t have to cohere with authentic Catholic teaching – their job is polluting and dissolving the Catholic Faith – and then substituting the “new authority” to replace the Apostolic Faith – that new authority being THEIR GIGANTIC SELVES.
And as Cdl. Kasper stated about V2 (I believe he stated it live on the air in an interview with Raymond Arroyo) it was purposefully written to be ambiguous to admit conflicting interpretations.
And no, I haven’t read every V2 document, but I have read SC over and over and over, and it is utterly ambiguous, and the “practical result” of exploiting SC is what the faithful Laszlo Dobszay called “the Bugnini Mass.”
I think I owe Dr. Peters an apology for missing his point.
He is reminding us that we, as Catholic people, are all people under the law, and per the memorable movie scene (in A Man for All Seasons) as St. Thomas More reminds us, the law is there to protect us from tyranny, including tyranny in the Vatican.
Dr Peters does not reassure me when he references writings of John Paul II. The powers in the vatican can simply continue on as if those writing are not important. No?
“Reasonable minds should “examine everything, and keep what is good” is a good start in assessing AL. Dr Peter’s is most often pertinent except regarding the intent evident in AL. Perhaps it’s that he cannot or declines to distinguish between canonical stricture and reasonable opinion [“I’m not a mind reader”]. The Pope has personally affirmed intent. Anyone who reads AL intelligently cannot gloss over intent to permit communion for D&R [that position of Hierarchy is what’s exacerbating division and error]. Roberto de Mattei is well intended but as Peters says is wrong in his assessment of Vat II. De Mattei is excessive in his condemnations there and elsewhere which harms his overall credibility. I agree with de Mattei on Vat II insofar as Dignitatis Humanae [Modernist Fr Courtney Murray SJ authored Dignitatis Humanae and believed God himself could not demand we deny our conscience] is a theological disaster placing preeminence on conscience v doctrine [in tandem with Cardinal Kasper who recently said conscience is a secret conclave between God and Man as if Christ’s words don’t exist]. Although there was effort that it be declared dogmatic it never was raised to that level and is not binding. Only Lumen Gentium and Verbum Dei were declared dogmatic. I strongly agree with de Mattei’s bleak assessment of the state of this debate in stark contrast to Edward Peters’ assessment who figures the Maltese Argentine German Philippine flights of heresy must be like derailed trains off the track of AL’s orthodoxy. Doesn’t the fact that the Pope hasn’t corrected or even criticized these heretical derailments mean anything? Edward Peter’s salient point however is “the Acta Apostolicae Sedis does not transform said memo or pope’s letter or bishops’ statement into “magisterial acts”.
So…. a few simple questions: Are divorced and “remarried” people committing adultery, or are they not? Is the gravity of a sin erased by the length of time it has been going on, or is it not? Does either question matter, or not? To interpret anything said or written by Pope Francis, we now have to depend upon the good will and orthodoxy of a whole busload of canon lawyers. This article clarifies nothing. It just adds to the confusion.
Since the D&R people were not remarried by a Catholic priest in a Catholic ceremony, they are not married. They are living in a free union, in concubinage. Concubinage is a mortal sin, a sin as serious as fornication or adultery.
I fully agree with Dr. Peters that the document of the Argentinian Bishops of the Buenos Aires province has not become part of the magisterium, but what about Francis’ answer? He promulgated it as an Apostolic Letter, maybe the lowest degree of the Magisterium, of course, but yet as a magisterial document, it seems.
The letter to the Buenos Aires bishops, as it was published in the AAS includes a special rescript as an addendum by Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Secretary of State. This rescript declares that Pope Francis expressly intends that BOTH documents – the pope’s letter and the Buenos Aires guidelines themselves- bear the character of his “authentic Magisterium”.
Even if canonically the specialists can say that the documents are not “authentic Magisterium”, the huge majority of bishops will say they are and implement the communion to D&R in their dioceses.
The is no other alternative.
Unless the Fraternal Correction is issued and the Pope declared a heretic, the change will become irreversible.
Jack if you say there is no other alternative you imply agreement that the letters per se regardless of the affirmation by Cardinal Parolin are binding. Cardinal Parolin is not the Pontiff and doesn’t share his authority. If you mean the large majority of bishops will follow suit as the only alternative we have to wait and see. Remember the majority voted in favor of Bishop Naumann to manage pro life agenda rather than the Pope’s favorita Cardinal Cupich. And the law matters. This Pontiff cannot abrogate the necessity to personally in writing or by his own spoken words definitively state his intention for communion for D&R. Many bishops are well aware of that.
“Perhaps that came out wrongly, but it is disconcerting to see the Second Vatican Council, an ecumenical council of the Catholic Church”
Latin traditionalists will have arguments for their claim that the council is not dogmatic. But non-Latins may question whether it should be regarded as an ecumenical council at all.
Peters does an excellent lawyerly job defending a client. But who is his client? Certainly it is not Bergoglio, who does what he wants and makes it pretty clear, to all who have eyes to see and ears to hear, what he is doing and means to do.
There is no excuse for anyone to be “confused” about it. Bergoglio is, in fact, intent on undermining the very basis of the Church’s moral doctrine, replacing reason and logic with a debased casuistry that also goes by the names consequentialism and proportionalism. The AAS publication of the Argentine correspondence is his response to the Dubia: In your faces. Whether or not that publication is or is not a magisterial act — or whether or not a magisterial act may include error — are questions of little moment. Bergoglio certainly isn’t interested in the answers. He speaks and acts as an exercise of raw power.
The problem with all well-meaning efforts to fit Bergoglio into some kind of continuity with Wojtyla and Ratzinger, or with the pre-Vatican II magisterium of the ages, is that he patently is not and obstinately and pertinaciously does not want to be in continuity. Thus, the Dubia, for example, though they profoundly and comprehensively raise all the “right questions”, come across as disingenuous (“Say it ain’t so, Father”).
Peters leads by saying: “… it is disconcerting to see the Second Vatican Council, an ecumenical council of the Catholic Church, listed alongside Modernism, a pernicious heresy, as if both could have been contributors to our present woes. Ignorance, even betrayal, of conciliar teachings by many of those responsible for its implementation is not the fault of a council, and an ecumenical council should not be listed alongside a heresy as a possible source of disaster.”
Here again, though, the question is not a matter of magisterial weight or authenticity. The real question is the use (or abuse) of power. Sure, one can pick through all of the Vatican II documents and find a way to reconcile them with the perennial teaching of the Church. (To a certain extent, that was what Wojtyla and Ratzinger believed to be a foundational task of the hermeneutic of continuity). But every “exegetical” exercise of this kind misses the main thing about Vatican II: it was a raw exercise of power to transform the Church under the inspiration of Modernism. The same can be said of the Council’s ongoing “implementation”.
The great virtue of de Mattei’s history of Vatican II is that he has documented the use of raw power that characterized the acts of the Council and its promoters.
Bergoglio truly is the heir of Vatican II.
Edward Pentin has a Dec.13 piece on part of this at NCRegister citing a number of diverse Catholic voices on this Argentine letter event. But here is yet another position by the AAS editors…with which I think Ed Peters would differ…
” The Vatican made clear in Acta Apostolicae Sedis that this private papal letter congratulating the bishops on their guidelines would be raised to the magisterial status of an apostolic letter (less magisterial than an encyclical but more than an apostolic exhortation). It also included a special rescript — an official papal decision on doctrine — written June 5 by Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican secretary of state, which declares that Pope Francis expressly intends that both his letter and the Buenos Aires guidelines are “authentic magisterium”.
The busy Catholic biologist, dentist, school teacher with endless homework correcting…does not have any spare time to sort out which Catholic canonist, Vatican secretary of state, theology prof, AAS editor….is correct that this letter is magisterial, non magisterial, lacking pan Bishop participation, etc. ec. etc.
Peter and Paul were simply preaching Christ. Those were the good ole days prior to 2000 years of nuances.
I imagine a father now telling his son to clean the basement…and the son asking….” how magisterial is that disciplinary exhortation, dad,( and can it be magisterial at all with no doctrinal assertion that the cellar is dirty) …is it less magisterial than marry a good woman but more magisterial than take out the garbage…what say ye?”
This excerpt from Prof Pink’s essay Conscience and Coercion 2012 is relevant to Dignitatis Humanae and the discussion here on conscience v Church doctrine and papal authority.
“The Catholic debate about religious liberty needs to move on from what is, where religion is concerned, the secondary issue of the authority and competence of the state, and address what is fundamental: the authority of the Church over those subject to her. We particularly need what is currently lacking—a theology of the Church that properly addresses her traditionally claimed authority to coerce individual belief and practice while explaining the doctrinal basis of and limits to the Church’s power of coercion. This will involve an appropriate theology of baptism and in particular of the obligations to the Church incurred through baptism. These are the very obligations that, as traditionally understood, could take political form and thus underpin state involvement in coercion, and which Dignitatis Humanae so carefully undertakes to preserve, but not to explain”. Thomas Pink is professor of philosophy at King’s College London.
Just as murdered people are in fact dead so a marriage is in fact ended when there is a divorce plus sexual intercourse with the new spouse. This is why adultery is so evil. A Catholic can be dedicated to the sanctity of marriage without declaring marriage indissoluble in all cases. A Catholic can be dedicated to the sanctity of life without having to declare the murdered person to be still alive. Murder, among other reasons, is evil precisely because the victim dies. Divorce and remarriage is evil precisely because there is disobedience toward God and because the bond of marriage is indeed broken. The first marriage no longer exists. Adultery is not an ongoing sin just as murder is not an ongoing sin if there is repentance. Just as the repentant murderer cannot bring his victim back to life so the repentant divorced and remarried cannot bring the first marriage back to life. In fact, an attempt by the spouse to go back to his first spouse after having divorced and remarried is condemned in the Bible. See Deuteronomy 24:3-4. The remarried persons must publicly confess the sinfulness of their actions and then publicly resolve to be faithful in the second marriage.
My wife divorced me and I was able to get an annulment from the Catholic Church. I never remarried though. I now see that this annulment to be more damaging to the Catholic Church’s determination to defend marriage than if the Catholic Church would have declared the marriage dead when my divorced wife remarried. Up until the remarriage, my wife and I could have reconciled. But the remarriage ended that possibility per Deut. 24:3-4. My former wife was now one flesh with her second husband. I believe my take on this subject to be biblical.
Rowland, Christ’s words contradict you in John 4:
” 16 Jesus said to her, “Go call your husband and come back.” 17 The woman answered and said to him, “I do not have a husband.” Jesus answered her, “You are right in saying, ‘I do not have a husband.’ 18 For you have had five husbands, and the one you have now is not your husband. What you have said is true.”
Christ is saying her real husband even now is a previous husband. A theologian from Boston College had your view of dead marriages but Christ did not. Theologians nowadays sometimes ignore Christ’s words…e.g. the head of the Jesuits says we don’t really have a tape recording of what Christ said…which of course means every human on earth can substitute their idea in place of Christ’s idea on any subject. Insanity is the name for that.
What is disconcerting is that Dr. Peters (and many others) doesn’t seem to understand the following:
1. Divine law trumps human law.
2. Canon law didn’t even exist for centuries.
3. The Magesterium trumps canon law.
4. Vatican II was declared by Pope Paul VI AND Pope John Paul II to be a PASTORAL council on 2 occasions each.
5. The implementation of the ‘teachings’ of Vatican II were carried out with papal sanction. Say not so all you want, the fact that no Pope after Vatican II has done anything to “correct” the implementation is all the proof necessary to one who sees reality as it truly is.
6. It is a matter of record that the documents that now comprise Vatican II are not what was originally drawn up to be voted on, and that the liberals at VII screwed with the whole process.
7. So called “conservative catholics” with the mindset of Dr. Peters had for decades trashed Traditional Catholics claiming that the Traditional Latin Mass was abrogated, that is until Pope Benedict XVI set the record straight in 2007.
8. These same people love to claim that the pope would never promote a heretic to the status of Cardinal, especially Pope John Paul II. I have 2 words in response to that assertion. Cardinal and Kasper.
The bottom line is that Dr. Peters is attempting to explain away something that has never happened in the history of the Church, rather than standing against it.
Too bad, since he has done a lot of good work in the past.
I am very grateful for the cogent analyses that Dr Peters has been offering in these confused times.
At this point, however, it just seems to me that no matter the proper distinctions to be made ( and that should be made), in the end, no one will pay much attention and a lot of damage is being done. I’m not reassured…
I wouldn’t say it was Vatican II, but rather how Vatican II was interpreted, or even misinterpreted that has caused a lot of problems for the Roman Catholic Church and faithful. Some religious and lay people seemed to think that Vatican II had given the Church its Protestant wavier and that all of a sudden Priests could marry, Nuns could marry, women could be ordained as Priests, you didn’t have to go to Mass, you didn’t have to do anything you didn’t want to do. Except, that wasn’t true. Most just seemed to think they knew what was in Vatican II, rather than actually reading it to find out. The problem persists to this day, unfortunately.
Am I missing something? The Pope knows that a valid marriage is forever; however, if the marriage is not valid, and the Pope has given Bishops the authority to guide those in such non-marriages, and with their guidance bring the persons back into the Church and allow them Communion – how can that be wrong. If there is no mortal sin (three things needed to be mortal), isn’t that person allowed Communion?
Yes, Eva, you are missing a lot (that, or you’re being all wide-eyed disingenuous). We are not talking about people who were in invalid marriages, whose marriages were declared null, and who then married someone else. We are talking about people whose marriages are presumably valid, who divorced their spouses, and then, despite still being married (since divorce is a purely civil affair and Christian marriage is indissoluble), “married” someone else and are living in a state of adultery, which is a mortal sin.
“A lasting and consummated marriage, with everything in order, continues and will continue to be indissoluble, and the Church can’t do anything about it because her Lord and Master did not grant her that authority. We are all disciples before Christ: only one is the Master, only one is the Guide, only one is the Lord,” he (Pope Francis) stressed.
This above quote doesn’t match how some people are interpreting and understanding what the Pope is saying. Maybe people are picking and choosing phrases out of context?
“This above quote doesn’t match how some people are interpreting and understanding what the Pope is saying.”
What he’s saying when, exactly? That’s the problem. He’ll say something orthodox, and then proceed to undermine it by saying other things that are most definitely not. And then when the unorthodoxy of the undermining statements is pointed out, people say, “But how can you say he’s unorthodox when he said something quite orthodox at some other point?”
If nothing else, such confusion and lack of clarity is very uncharitable.
Reference to “We are talking about people whose marriages are “presumably” valid,…”
Here, Leslie, I believe the Pope was indeed talking about marriages that are invalid and not “presumably” valid. (He previously made the comment that he believed a lot of marriages that were in the Church could be considered invalid.
I believe he is offering the Lord’s mercy to those.
I am one of those who calls Vatican ll Modernist. Take some simple facts into consideration. The Council of St. Pope John XXlll was a completed Council with 70 Decrees. The Bishops of the world were called to Rome for Oct. 11, 1962, not to start the Council but to finalize it with the Bishop’s signatures. The Modernists had a plot, they met up until Oct 10, 1962. They in a vicious scheme voted out the Council of St. Pope John XXlll and they then made their own Council. After their Council, the Church has been falling apart for 6 decades. Know them by their fruits.
Somehow Peters is not especially reassuring. If it is this hard to figure out what is and is not part of the Magisterium, how is this very different than Protestants invoking an infallible Bible with so many varying interpretations. Vatican II have a foothold to Modernism by its format of highly prolix documents that allowed diverse readings…. much like this papacy.
Amen.
Hi Joe M. Actually, I am quite reassuring. The norms for navigating these waters are fairly clear at this point, but when those in high places refuse to adhere to them, well, yes, it is hard to figure out what is going on. We do the best we can with the hand we are dealt. Cordially, dr.p.
I really hate using the term, but… the neo-Catholic band marches on.
Of course AL is a litmus test. As Peters’ response suggests, there are some bad parts that we should reject–but what’s wrong with a little leaven?
To use a the words of AL itself, it can no longer simply be said that small errors infect the whole. Leo XIII must have left mercy at the door when he taught: “There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition.”
Sorry, I’m not that bright, but Pope Francis and Pope Leo XIII can’t both be right. I have more confidence in Pope Leo if I am forced to choose.
. I wonder how many very intelligent human beings look into Catholicism and turn away because of this endlessly complex area of what is authoritative…what isn’t….and what might be but authorities vary on that too….where is it printed…how many times did he say it. It seems endless. Two dissenters on Humanae Vitae were periti at Vatican II…one a previously conservative moral theologian, Bernard Haring,….the other Karl Rahner who edited Denzigers Enchiridion Symbolorum which calibrates what’s authoritative. It’s simply off putting…the endless non clarity of the whole topic. Then when no Pope censured either of those two men in their dissent…the fog thickened. We convert often people from the African bush and parts of Asia but are we turning off many educated who see this said area of the doctrinal as endlessly foggy measured by the pedigree of those within the Church who disagree on what is definitive. It seems endless especially when Popes censure virtually no one…unless a writer attacks something mega major like the Trinity…then there’s excommunication.
“Ignorance, even betrayal, of conciliar teachings by many of those responsible for its implementation is not the fault of a council, and an ecumenical council should not be listed alongside a heresy as a possible source of disaster.”
No; but writing the documents of a council so poorly that they permit ignorance and misinterpretation and provide cover for betrayal is the fault of a council. And is a possible source of disaster.
In my experience, 97%+ of Catholics have never read the documents, or even the four Constitutions, of the Council. That even goes for many priests, who spout nonsense about this or that being “of the Council”, even though it’s simply not the case.
Yes. I wonder if the Council Fathers who took those documents back to their archdioceses and implemented them– read them.
I’ll stick with Dr. Peters and Canon 915 on a better technical understanding of the actions in this papacy.
At some point, Pope Francis will have to show his hand in a manner that will not need the intricate explanations of a seasoned canon lawyer.
I love and admire Dr. Peters, and I know that he is right about Canon Law and authority.
But in practice (I.e. the gaming of the system by Ivereigh’s Team Bergoglio) the gigantic problem is mentioned in para 7: a lot of the content of AL and the associated letters, memos etc etc (and V2 documents) is sound theology and moral teaching, and the other parts “cannot be proven to be heterodox.” And then in a later paragraph – Dr. P states the main problem (I.e. the intention of Ivereigh’s Team Bergoglio): all of this can be exploited.
I must admit that Ivereigh’s Team Bergoglio, and “theologians” like Cdl. Kasper (a Cardinal! is the Church out of its mind?) and Massimo Faggioli et al are post-Catholic. Their “theology” doesn’t have to cohere with authentic Catholic teaching – their job is polluting and dissolving the Catholic Faith – and then substituting the “new authority” to replace the Apostolic Faith – that new authority being THEIR GIGANTIC SELVES.
And as Cdl. Kasper stated about V2 (I believe he stated it live on the air in an interview with Raymond Arroyo) it was purposefully written to be ambiguous to admit conflicting interpretations.
That’s the game: ambiguity.
And no, I haven’t read every V2 document, but I have read SC over and over and over, and it is utterly ambiguous, and the “practical result” of exploiting SC is what the faithful Laszlo Dobszay called “the Bugnini Mass.”
Grief seems to be the apt emotion.
I think I owe Dr. Peters an apology for missing his point.
He is reminding us that we, as Catholic people, are all people under the law, and per the memorable movie scene (in A Man for All Seasons) as St. Thomas More reminds us, the law is there to protect us from tyranny, including tyranny in the Vatican.
Dr Peters does not reassure me when he references writings of John Paul II. The powers in the vatican can simply continue on as if those writing are not important. No?
“Reasonable minds should “examine everything, and keep what is good” is a good start in assessing AL. Dr Peter’s is most often pertinent except regarding the intent evident in AL. Perhaps it’s that he cannot or declines to distinguish between canonical stricture and reasonable opinion [“I’m not a mind reader”]. The Pope has personally affirmed intent. Anyone who reads AL intelligently cannot gloss over intent to permit communion for D&R [that position of Hierarchy is what’s exacerbating division and error]. Roberto de Mattei is well intended but as Peters says is wrong in his assessment of Vat II. De Mattei is excessive in his condemnations there and elsewhere which harms his overall credibility. I agree with de Mattei on Vat II insofar as Dignitatis Humanae [Modernist Fr Courtney Murray SJ authored Dignitatis Humanae and believed God himself could not demand we deny our conscience] is a theological disaster placing preeminence on conscience v doctrine [in tandem with Cardinal Kasper who recently said conscience is a secret conclave between God and Man as if Christ’s words don’t exist]. Although there was effort that it be declared dogmatic it never was raised to that level and is not binding. Only Lumen Gentium and Verbum Dei were declared dogmatic. I strongly agree with de Mattei’s bleak assessment of the state of this debate in stark contrast to Edward Peters’ assessment who figures the Maltese Argentine German Philippine flights of heresy must be like derailed trains off the track of AL’s orthodoxy. Doesn’t the fact that the Pope hasn’t corrected or even criticized these heretical derailments mean anything? Edward Peter’s salient point however is “the Acta Apostolicae Sedis does not transform said memo or pope’s letter or bishops’ statement into “magisterial acts”.
So…. a few simple questions: Are divorced and “remarried” people committing adultery, or are they not? Is the gravity of a sin erased by the length of time it has been going on, or is it not? Does either question matter, or not? To interpret anything said or written by Pope Francis, we now have to depend upon the good will and orthodoxy of a whole busload of canon lawyers. This article clarifies nothing. It just adds to the confusion.
Since the D&R people were not remarried by a Catholic priest in a Catholic ceremony, they are not married. They are living in a free union, in concubinage. Concubinage is a mortal sin, a sin as serious as fornication or adultery.
I fully agree with Dr. Peters that the document of the Argentinian Bishops of the Buenos Aires province has not become part of the magisterium, but what about Francis’ answer? He promulgated it as an Apostolic Letter, maybe the lowest degree of the Magisterium, of course, but yet as a magisterial document, it seems.
The letter to the Buenos Aires bishops, as it was published in the AAS includes a special rescript as an addendum by Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Secretary of State. This rescript declares that Pope Francis expressly intends that BOTH documents – the pope’s letter and the Buenos Aires guidelines themselves- bear the character of his “authentic Magisterium”.
Even if canonically the specialists can say that the documents are not “authentic Magisterium”, the huge majority of bishops will say they are and implement the communion to D&R in their dioceses.
The is no other alternative.
Unless the Fraternal Correction is issued and the Pope declared a heretic, the change will become irreversible.
Jack if you say there is no other alternative you imply agreement that the letters per se regardless of the affirmation by Cardinal Parolin are binding. Cardinal Parolin is not the Pontiff and doesn’t share his authority. If you mean the large majority of bishops will follow suit as the only alternative we have to wait and see. Remember the majority voted in favor of Bishop Naumann to manage pro life agenda rather than the Pope’s favorita Cardinal Cupich. And the law matters. This Pontiff cannot abrogate the necessity to personally in writing or by his own spoken words definitively state his intention for communion for D&R. Many bishops are well aware of that.
A fraternal correction can be issued on particular ambiguities; but that doesn’t mean the Pope can be declared a heretic [even if he is].
“Perhaps that came out wrongly, but it is disconcerting to see the Second Vatican Council, an ecumenical council of the Catholic Church”
Latin traditionalists will have arguments for their claim that the council is not dogmatic. But non-Latins may question whether it should be regarded as an ecumenical council at all.
Peters does an excellent lawyerly job defending a client. But who is his client? Certainly it is not Bergoglio, who does what he wants and makes it pretty clear, to all who have eyes to see and ears to hear, what he is doing and means to do.
There is no excuse for anyone to be “confused” about it. Bergoglio is, in fact, intent on undermining the very basis of the Church’s moral doctrine, replacing reason and logic with a debased casuistry that also goes by the names consequentialism and proportionalism. The AAS publication of the Argentine correspondence is his response to the Dubia: In your faces. Whether or not that publication is or is not a magisterial act — or whether or not a magisterial act may include error — are questions of little moment. Bergoglio certainly isn’t interested in the answers. He speaks and acts as an exercise of raw power.
The problem with all well-meaning efforts to fit Bergoglio into some kind of continuity with Wojtyla and Ratzinger, or with the pre-Vatican II magisterium of the ages, is that he patently is not and obstinately and pertinaciously does not want to be in continuity. Thus, the Dubia, for example, though they profoundly and comprehensively raise all the “right questions”, come across as disingenuous (“Say it ain’t so, Father”).
Peters leads by saying: “… it is disconcerting to see the Second Vatican Council, an ecumenical council of the Catholic Church, listed alongside Modernism, a pernicious heresy, as if both could have been contributors to our present woes. Ignorance, even betrayal, of conciliar teachings by many of those responsible for its implementation is not the fault of a council, and an ecumenical council should not be listed alongside a heresy as a possible source of disaster.”
Here again, though, the question is not a matter of magisterial weight or authenticity. The real question is the use (or abuse) of power. Sure, one can pick through all of the Vatican II documents and find a way to reconcile them with the perennial teaching of the Church. (To a certain extent, that was what Wojtyla and Ratzinger believed to be a foundational task of the hermeneutic of continuity). But every “exegetical” exercise of this kind misses the main thing about Vatican II: it was a raw exercise of power to transform the Church under the inspiration of Modernism. The same can be said of the Council’s ongoing “implementation”.
The great virtue of de Mattei’s history of Vatican II is that he has documented the use of raw power that characterized the acts of the Council and its promoters.
Bergoglio truly is the heir of Vatican II.
Bravo. Best assessment of PF and his agenda.
Edward Pentin has a Dec.13 piece on part of this at NCRegister citing a number of diverse Catholic voices on this Argentine letter event. But here is yet another position by the AAS editors…with which I think Ed Peters would differ…
” The Vatican made clear in Acta Apostolicae Sedis that this private papal letter congratulating the bishops on their guidelines would be raised to the magisterial status of an apostolic letter (less magisterial than an encyclical but more than an apostolic exhortation). It also included a special rescript — an official papal decision on doctrine — written June 5 by Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican secretary of state, which declares that Pope Francis expressly intends that both his letter and the Buenos Aires guidelines are “authentic magisterium”.
The busy Catholic biologist, dentist, school teacher with endless homework correcting…does not have any spare time to sort out which Catholic canonist, Vatican secretary of state, theology prof, AAS editor….is correct that this letter is magisterial, non magisterial, lacking pan Bishop participation, etc. ec. etc.
Peter and Paul were simply preaching Christ. Those were the good ole days prior to 2000 years of nuances.
I imagine a father now telling his son to clean the basement…and the son asking….” how magisterial is that disciplinary exhortation, dad,( and can it be magisterial at all with no doctrinal assertion that the cellar is dirty) …is it less magisterial than marry a good woman but more magisterial than take out the garbage…what say ye?”
This excerpt from Prof Pink’s essay Conscience and Coercion 2012 is relevant to Dignitatis Humanae and the discussion here on conscience v Church doctrine and papal authority.
“The Catholic debate about religious liberty needs to move on from what is, where religion is concerned, the secondary issue of the authority and competence of the state, and address what is fundamental: the authority of the Church over those subject to her. We particularly need what is currently lacking—a theology of the Church that properly addresses her traditionally claimed authority to coerce individual belief and practice while explaining the doctrinal basis of and limits to the Church’s power of coercion. This will involve an appropriate theology of baptism and in particular of the obligations to the Church incurred through baptism. These are the very obligations that, as traditionally understood, could take political form and thus underpin state involvement in coercion, and which Dignitatis Humanae so carefully undertakes to preserve, but not to explain”. Thomas Pink is professor of philosophy at King’s College London.
Just as murdered people are in fact dead so a marriage is in fact ended when there is a divorce plus sexual intercourse with the new spouse. This is why adultery is so evil. A Catholic can be dedicated to the sanctity of marriage without declaring marriage indissoluble in all cases. A Catholic can be dedicated to the sanctity of life without having to declare the murdered person to be still alive. Murder, among other reasons, is evil precisely because the victim dies. Divorce and remarriage is evil precisely because there is disobedience toward God and because the bond of marriage is indeed broken. The first marriage no longer exists. Adultery is not an ongoing sin just as murder is not an ongoing sin if there is repentance. Just as the repentant murderer cannot bring his victim back to life so the repentant divorced and remarried cannot bring the first marriage back to life. In fact, an attempt by the spouse to go back to his first spouse after having divorced and remarried is condemned in the Bible. See Deuteronomy 24:3-4. The remarried persons must publicly confess the sinfulness of their actions and then publicly resolve to be faithful in the second marriage.
My wife divorced me and I was able to get an annulment from the Catholic Church. I never remarried though. I now see that this annulment to be more damaging to the Catholic Church’s determination to defend marriage than if the Catholic Church would have declared the marriage dead when my divorced wife remarried. Up until the remarriage, my wife and I could have reconciled. But the remarriage ended that possibility per Deut. 24:3-4. My former wife was now one flesh with her second husband. I believe my take on this subject to be biblical.
Rowland, Christ’s words contradict you in John 4:
” 16 Jesus said to her, “Go call your husband and come back.” 17 The woman answered and said to him, “I do not have a husband.” Jesus answered her, “You are right in saying, ‘I do not have a husband.’ 18 For you have had five husbands, and the one you have now is not your husband. What you have said is true.”
Christ is saying her real husband even now is a previous husband. A theologian from Boston College had your view of dead marriages but Christ did not. Theologians nowadays sometimes ignore Christ’s words…e.g. the head of the Jesuits says we don’t really have a tape recording of what Christ said…which of course means every human on earth can substitute their idea in place of Christ’s idea on any subject. Insanity is the name for that.
What is disconcerting is that Dr. Peters (and many others) doesn’t seem to understand the following:
1. Divine law trumps human law.
2. Canon law didn’t even exist for centuries.
3. The Magesterium trumps canon law.
4. Vatican II was declared by Pope Paul VI AND Pope John Paul II to be a PASTORAL council on 2 occasions each.
5. The implementation of the ‘teachings’ of Vatican II were carried out with papal sanction. Say not so all you want, the fact that no Pope after Vatican II has done anything to “correct” the implementation is all the proof necessary to one who sees reality as it truly is.
6. It is a matter of record that the documents that now comprise Vatican II are not what was originally drawn up to be voted on, and that the liberals at VII screwed with the whole process.
7. So called “conservative catholics” with the mindset of Dr. Peters had for decades trashed Traditional Catholics claiming that the Traditional Latin Mass was abrogated, that is until Pope Benedict XVI set the record straight in 2007.
8. These same people love to claim that the pope would never promote a heretic to the status of Cardinal, especially Pope John Paul II. I have 2 words in response to that assertion. Cardinal and Kasper.
The bottom line is that Dr. Peters is attempting to explain away something that has never happened in the history of the Church, rather than standing against it.
Too bad, since he has done a lot of good work in the past.
I am very grateful for the cogent analyses that Dr Peters has been offering in these confused times.
At this point, however, it just seems to me that no matter the proper distinctions to be made ( and that should be made), in the end, no one will pay much attention and a lot of damage is being done. I’m not reassured…
I wouldn’t say it was Vatican II, but rather how Vatican II was interpreted, or even misinterpreted that has caused a lot of problems for the Roman Catholic Church and faithful. Some religious and lay people seemed to think that Vatican II had given the Church its Protestant wavier and that all of a sudden Priests could marry, Nuns could marry, women could be ordained as Priests, you didn’t have to go to Mass, you didn’t have to do anything you didn’t want to do. Except, that wasn’t true. Most just seemed to think they knew what was in Vatican II, rather than actually reading it to find out. The problem persists to this day, unfortunately.
Am I missing something? The Pope knows that a valid marriage is forever; however, if the marriage is not valid, and the Pope has given Bishops the authority to guide those in such non-marriages, and with their guidance bring the persons back into the Church and allow them Communion – how can that be wrong. If there is no mortal sin (three things needed to be mortal), isn’t that person allowed Communion?
Alas, Eva, you appear to have missed the past four years…
Yes, Eva, you are missing a lot (that, or you’re being all wide-eyed disingenuous). We are not talking about people who were in invalid marriages, whose marriages were declared null, and who then married someone else. We are talking about people whose marriages are presumably valid, who divorced their spouses, and then, despite still being married (since divorce is a purely civil affair and Christian marriage is indissoluble), “married” someone else and are living in a state of adultery, which is a mortal sin.
Quote from Pope Francis:
“A lasting and consummated marriage, with everything in order, continues and will continue to be indissoluble, and the Church can’t do anything about it because her Lord and Master did not grant her that authority. We are all disciples before Christ: only one is the Master, only one is the Guide, only one is the Lord,” he (Pope Francis) stressed.
This above quote doesn’t match how some people are interpreting and understanding what the Pope is saying. Maybe people are picking and choosing phrases out of context?
“This above quote doesn’t match how some people are interpreting and understanding what the Pope is saying.”
What he’s saying when, exactly? That’s the problem. He’ll say something orthodox, and then proceed to undermine it by saying other things that are most definitely not. And then when the unorthodoxy of the undermining statements is pointed out, people say, “But how can you say he’s unorthodox when he said something quite orthodox at some other point?”
If nothing else, such confusion and lack of clarity is very uncharitable.
Reference to “We are talking about people whose marriages are “presumably” valid,…”
Here, Leslie, I believe the Pope was indeed talking about marriages that are invalid and not “presumably” valid. (He previously made the comment that he believed a lot of marriages that were in the Church could be considered invalid.
I believe he is offering the Lord’s mercy to those.
I am one of those who calls Vatican ll Modernist. Take some simple facts into consideration. The Council of St. Pope John XXlll was a completed Council with 70 Decrees. The Bishops of the world were called to Rome for Oct. 11, 1962, not to start the Council but to finalize it with the Bishop’s signatures. The Modernists had a plot, they met up until Oct 10, 1962. They in a vicious scheme voted out the Council of St. Pope John XXlll and they then made their own Council. After their Council, the Church has been falling apart for 6 decades. Know them by their fruits.