Saturday, January 06, 2018

Father Zuhlsdorf gets to the crux of the controversy over Amoris laetitia: Christ or Chaos?

“You must do your duty and make chaos all night..." - Francis to Krakow, Poland youth.

Father John Zuhlsdorf, referring to Francis' Amoris laetitia, gets to the crux of the matter:

"If the unrepentent sinner, unshriven and without a firm purpose of amendment, can officially be admitted to Holy Communion, it’s game over for discipline in the Church.  It’s over for authoritative teaching on faith and morals.

If Christ was wrong about marriage and divorce, then He isn’t God and everything we are doing is pointless and idolatrous."

Lumen Gentium, No. 25, referring to the Pontiff's infallibility, teaches clearly that, "...this infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed His Church to be endowed in defining doctrine of faith and morals, extends as far as the deposit of Revelation extends, which must be religiously guarded and faithfully expounded."

Got that?  Pay attention now.  The Pope's infallibility "extends as far as the deposit of Revelation extends."  It does not surpass or supercede Revelation, a Revelation from the Lord Jesus which must be "religiously guarded and faithfully expounded."

The Pope is the Custodian of the Deposit of Faith, not its Master.

Pope Saint John Paul II, in Familiaris Consortio, No. 84, taught authoritatively that:

"The Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist. Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage.

Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who, repenting of having broken the sign of the Covenant and of fidelity to Christ, are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means, in practice, that when, for serious reasons, such as for example the children’s upbringing, a man and a woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate, they “take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples." —Familiaris Consortio, “On the Role of the Christian Family in the Modern World”, No. 84.

There is confusion in the Church because Francis isn't satisfied with being the Custodian of the Deposit of Faith.  He wants to be its Master.


Paul Anthony Melanson said...

Cyn M said...

Brings to mind the first one to say to God: "I will not serve!" So, with whom is Francis allying himself?

Anonymous said...

Question: When St. John Paul II inserted his personal opinion in the CCC about the legitimacy of the death penalty, was he being a custodian of the Deposit of Faith? A faith that had always taught that the state should have recourse to the death penalty, as a matter of retributive justice? Did not JPII's actions pave the way for the heresy of a pope like Bergoglio?

Steve D.

Paul Anthony Melanson said...

Answer by Colin Donovan, STL:

Liam Ronan said...

"Every word of God is tested; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him. Do not add to His words or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar." Proverbs 30:5-6

"I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book." Revelation 22:18-19

There's an ungodly amount of addin' and subtractin' been goin' on by the Bishop of Rome. May Almighty God in His Mercy rebuke and discipline the Bishop of Rome, for as scripture says:

"Such as I love, I rebuke and chastise. Be zealous therefore, and do penance." Revelation 3:19

Paul Anthony Melanson said...

A more detailed analysis of the question of Capital Punishment by Father Thomas Williams here:

Paul Anthony Melanson said...

From the article:

Despite..instances of support for the legitimacy of capital punishment on the part of the Magisterium, many theologians do not see in these pronouncements an unreformable teaching, at least prior to the publication of Evangelium Vitae. There has been considerable agreement that the received position on capital punishment was generally taken for granted but never formally declared by the Magisterium. As a representative example, Anselm Gunthor wrote in 1979 that, regarding capital punishment, 'the statements of the ecclesial Magisterium are occasional assertions and do not represent a fully definitive position; we must not undervalue them, but nor should we consider them to be unchangeable and perennially valid Magisterial statements.'"

Paul Anthony Melanson said...

And again:

For its part, theological reflection has generally affirmed the legitimacy of capital punishment, though this was not so from the beginning. In the first centuries of Christianity the Mosaic precept against killing was interpreted literally and without exceptions. Capital punishment was considered irreconcilable with the faith, and such occupations as judge and soldier were excluded from licit professions for Christians, in order to avoid having to pronounce or execute the death sentence. Among those who taught in this vein were Lactantius, Tertullian, St. Cyprian, and St. Ambrose. In tongue-in-cheek fashion, St. Cyprian writes: "A homicide committed for private interests is a crime; committed in the name of the State it is a virtue."

TLM said...

Cyn M.......I'll give you three guesses who he is serving, and the first two don't count. BTW, I know you intended that to be more of a statement rather than a question, but, just had to throw that in:)

Ana Milan said...

I believe the Pope is being held in a secure place within the Vatican precincts. The mouthpiece making all these changes has not been licitly elected & never calls himself Vicar of Christ. Neither has he proclaimed Papal Infallibility by speaking ex cathedra because he knows he hasn't got it - that still resides with PBXVI. I believe most of the Hierarchy know this but are in cahoots with PF. PBXVI hinted recently in a letter to ++Müller that a Cardinal & Bishop never really retires, so how is retirement (resignation) possible for a Pope?

Site Meter