Theologians Propose to Re-Write Catechism & Canon Law in Light of Amoris Laetitia 0 BY MAIKE HICKSON ON JUNE 17, 2016FEATURED, NEWS An article published on 12 June bykathpress.at — the Catholic news agency partly funded by the Austrian bishops — has received a great deal of attention in Europe. Two Italian websites — La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana and Il Timone — have both reported on it. So has the Austrian Catholic websitekath.net. The reason for all the attention is that the article at kathpress.at includes several important statements from progressive Catholic theologians who have unmistakably read Amoris Laetitia in a very lax and sentimentally liberal way. One statement is taken from the Swiss theologian Eva-Maria Faber, who, in a paper written together with a colleague(Martin Lintner), proposes to adapt the Catholic Catechism to the new developments as proposed by the papal exhortation Amoris Laetitia. Additionally, Rainer Bucher — another theologian from Graz, Austria — proposes now to “re-contextualize moral theology and canon law” in light of Amoris Laetitia. According to kathpress, another theologian, Stephan Goertz — a strong defender of homosexuality — sees thatAmoris Laetitia has “made free [sic]the path for different interpretations in the local dioceses.” According to kathpress, another German theologian with a well-known progressive background, Klaus Lüdicke, stresses that Pope Francis has now re-defined “irregular relationships” in general, saying that they cannot per se be any longer regarded as gravely sinful. He has therefore come to the conclusion that all these couples – to include the “remarried” divorcees – should now be permitted access to the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Faber and Lintner reached a similar conclusion, claiming that no “irregular situation” can per se be described as being gravely sinful – according to Amoris Laetitia itself. Important to remember in this context is that Professor Faber of Chur, Switzerland, was one of the speakers at the controversial May 2015 “Shadow Council” at the Gregorian University in Rome. As German Catholic authorMathias von Gersdorff says, Professor Faber had previously written a book where she puts in doubt the indissolubility of marriage. Martin Lintner had also caused a stir when he was interviewed last summer by the German branch of Vatican Radio, which first published the interview accompanied by a picture showing two women kissing. It was Rome Correspondent Edward Pentin who first reported on the story to the English-speaking world. In the interview, Lintner proposed that it was time to “rethink the Catholic Church’s teaching on homosexuality.” The Austrian Catholic news agency’s editorial tone on these issues is noticeably neutral, concluding with these words: “To sum it up: after Amoris Laetitia, it is now up to the local churches and Bishops’ Conferences to draw their own pastoral conclusions from the document.” By way of contrast, La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana offers commentary that is more faithful to the Catholic Church’s own traditional moral teaching. The latter publication questions whether the “novelty of Amoris Laetitia” – which seems to be pastoral, but might also actually lead to a doctrinal “revision of the Catechism” – has, after all, anything to do with a “harmonious development.”
Now, there's a surprise! Time for me to start praying that Cardinal Schonborn is never elected Pope. I have seen plenty of predictions that he is a favourite to succeed Pope Francis.
"That's what Joe Crozier said". Ah well you had better listen if Joe Crozier said it. Ha ha. He is infallible you know! Here is another little non sequitur as they have been referred to on this forum: Francis will not deviate from dogma nor cease to defend and promote Truth. He will not corrupt the Corpus but preserve and grow its health and well being if he is allowed by his opponents in and out of the Vatican, in and out of the Church. That's what Joe Crozier said. I was recently told that for those who cast doubt and derision on the Holy Father it will be cast back on them as a curse. I don't know the source but it sounds like a good bet to me. The Catechism may well be re written by theologians but if it contradicts Truth, Pope Francis will never give it his stamp of approval. I think it was John Paul II who warned theologians not to destroy the common faith of the common people with their clever writings. Edit. So did Pope Benedict. He warned against their destructive arrogance.
Who the heck is "Maike Hickson"? Only thing I found was: She is a happy housewife who likes to write articles when time permits. How nice! So let's find ways, in those precious "permitted" moments of time available, to stir the pot of ignorance and introduce stuff that has nothing to do with the reality of the current moment. But that reality never stops folks in these times....esp. those considered with such "good" intentions. People seem to really look forward to that predicted apostasy and split....so speeding it along with conjecture must make their apparent desire for its fulfillment to feel justified. Be careful what you wish for. All these "theologians" coming out of the woodwork, of whom, btw, Francis has never been a fan. He doesn't believe that theologians in general ever come to any conclusion that they all could agree upon. He thinks those who wait for that will be waiting forever! While they're up in the clouds he's planted on terra firm!
I am not certain if this was posted somewhere already. http://www.ncregister.com/daily-new...le-of-u.s.-bishops-amoris-laetitia-committee/
A curse??!! My goodness, Joe, are ya getting your tarot cards read too? What a terrible thing to repeat. What's next? A voodoo doll of Briank?
Why is it these very same theologians are Pope Francis' biggest fans then? Folks just aren't paying attention. (And the personal identity of the author of these facts doesn't matter, and does not make the facts any less factual.)
My my....now you know all of the Pope's fans too and differentiate between who are the lesser fans and who are the biggest! ha! You yourself must be in with the in crowd....just like Maike, the happy housewife "author" who writes now and then when time permits! I'm a big fan of Placido Domingo too but he doesn't know me from Adam!
You must have missed that she has a doctorate and has written for multiple Catholic publications. Oh, no, you couldn't have missed that because you pulled out your quote about her from the rest of the info about her. In other words, you misrepresented her credentials to try to win a point in an Internet discussion. Impressive.
So what? If you haven't noticed there are a gazillion doctorates floating around these days whose owners could, if wanting themselves to be taken seriously, would have more practice currently to stay accurate in all things, by writing more than only occasionally, and only "when time permits", and, btw, have their individual expertise at least within the subject being treated. Her background is in history and French literature....not exactly lending to an ability to critique theologians other than what anyone could discover by simply reading the background of those particular theologians who just happen to be slanted in their reported opinions towards the liberal side, and thus also just happen to fit the purpose of the author's own goal of persuasion. Thus, once again you fail in your wished for discrediting of one who offers a differing opinion on the subject than your own. I shall thank you ahead of time for your apology. I misrepresented no one. Looks like you just may have made that mistake yourself. She still wants her identity to be primarily one as a "happy housewife" who only writes occasionally...for that is her permitted personal description for the article cited. You sound like those today who would anoint attys as the only top notch ones as those coming out of Harvard or Yale....but nevertheless still don't have a truthful grasp on the Constitution. There are also a lot of those....they happen to be in the current regime....and look at what all that still limited, nonetheless, "expertise" has gotten us now for quite some time. But in these cases the subject, law, is at least within their bailiwicks.
Perhaps this should have its own thread (or perhaps put in book threads) but this is linked on Drudge now: In memoirs, ex Pope Benedict says Vatican 'gay lobby' tried to wield power: report https://ca.news.yahoo.com/memoirs-ex-pope-benedict-says-vatican-gay-lobby-105129237.html Benedict to tell all about troubled time at the Vatican https://www.yahoo.com/news/benedict-tell-troubled-time-vatican-131731628.html?ref=gs
Interpretation of Amoris Laetitia Archbishop Chaput: ‘Remarried’ Catholics must be abstinent to receive Communion https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/a...tholics-must-be-abstinent-to-receive-communio Pope Francis’s apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia permits divorced and civilly remarried Catholics to access the sacraments on a case-by-case basis, three German bishops claim. https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/e...or-divorced-remarried-on-case-by-case-basis-c Which one is the correct interpretation of AL? They cannot both be correct.
It's obvious which one is correct, and which one was planned by this pope and foisted upon the Church. The Church will obviously correct this situation in the future. Until then the Church will seem to be in eclipse, driven underground and ceasing to exist.
