Wednesday, April 20, 2016

Cardinal Schonborn could respond to Christopher Ferrara saying,'You accept the new moral theology, like Cardinal Burke, so why are you complaining ?'

635787944691218460 EPA USA POPE FRANCIS VISIT
from The Remnant Newspaper : Amoris Laetitia: Anatomy of a Pontifical Debacle
Christopher Ferrara :
But even if we assume that this document is apparently an act of the Magisterium, in reality it simply cannot be.
Cardinal Schonborn could respond saying, :'This document is based on the new moral theology which assumes there are known exceptions,subjective factors which are objectively known as exceptions to going to Hell.
So the old moral theology is superseded in practise, defacto, objectively.Theoretically, ideally, in principle (opposed to defacto, being in fact) it is accepted.
However de facto,objectively it is rejected.Since there are known exceptions to the general rule.'
He could further say 'Christopher Ferrara and Cardinal Burke among others,  accept the new moral theology, and the new salvation theology.They postulate,that  theoretical cases can be objective exceptions to traditional teaching.This is a given.No one contests this point'.

 Just as God cannot contradict Himself, the Magisterium cannot contradict itself.
However the Magisterium and the traditionalists and conservatives and Catholics in general accept that hypothetical cases  can be objective exceptions in the present times to the traditional de fide teachings on morals and faith.There is consensus here.This is a break with the 16th century Catholics.
Amoris Laetita(301) is based on this new moral theology.
National Catholic Register
Cardinal Raymond Burke accepts this new reasoning as being part of the constant teaching of the Church and her discipline.

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... 
In other words, a post-synodal apostolic exhortation, by its very nature, does not propose new doctrine and discipline, but applies the perennial doctrine and discipline to the situation of the world at the time.- Cardinal Raymong Burke, ‘Amoris Laetitia’ and the Constant Teaching and Practice of the Church, National Catholic Register 1

I repeat ,that mortal sin or the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) has known exceptions in the present times,for  Cardinal Burke,and this is the constant teaching of the Catholic Church, for him. 
 For the Magisterium is the teaching office the Church; it presents what the Church teaches, which is not determined by the latest utterance of the current Pope.
 Cardinal Schonborn would agree here.The new theology existed during the pontificate of Pope John Paul II when Cardinal Ratzinger was the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church mentioned the three conditions for mortal sin without clarifying that they were hypothetical cases and not known personally,objectively.

The Catechism also mentions being saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance,without clarifying that they are hypothetical cases.So they cannot be exceptions to the dogma EENS according to the 16th missionaries.
So now to assume hypothetical cases are defacto, explicit exceptions to traditional teaching is official and magisterial.This is the reasoning in this new document.

 Therefore, whatever contradicts the constant prior teaching of the Church cannot possibly belong to the Magisterium, no matter what formal appearances it has been given.
Lionel: To assume hypothetical cases are defacto exceptions to the constant prior teaching of the Church, creates a non traditional conclusion. Traditionalists can not say that this is irrational or heretical since they themself use this 'philosophical reasoning'and believe it has been the constant teaching of the Catholic Church.

 Rather, it would constitute error, which is possible with any exercise of the “ordinary” Magisterium that involves true novelties.
Lionel: This 'philosophical reasoning' is a novelty and innovation but this is how Christopher Ferrara and Bishop Bernard Fellay, for example. interpret magisterial documents.'So why is there an objection from Chris Ferrara?", Cardinal Schonborn could ask.

 Otherwise, we would have to say that absolutely every papal pronouncement, no matter what novelty it contains, is infallible. Nor can we place the least reliance on the treacherous Cardinal Schönborn’sassurance, the usual Modernist doubletalk, that “There are true novelties in this document, but no ruptures.”
Lionel: The novelty is created by the new philosophical reasoning, which is accepted by the traditionalists including Cardinal Raymond Burke.There is no rupture in the hypothetical, theoretical sense but there is a rupture in praxis, in discipline, since there are known exceptions to the hypothetical, faith teachings.

 True novelties in the Church’s moral theology and its bimillenial application to public adulterers and fornicators are ruptures by definition.
Lionel: Yes since the principle behind this new discipline is that there are known exceptions in the present times.There are known people living in manifest mortal sin and who will not be going to Hell.
One can hypothesize that there are exceptions(due to ignorance for example). But one has to leave it at that.You cannot say that they are exceptions in real life, for sure, since this would presume that you know what only God could know.
The moment you say there are exceptions in personal cases. you imply that these exceptions are objective.They would have to be known,objective to be exceptions  to going to Hell.This is not possible for us human beings to know objectively.
Who among us can say that a friend or family member,is an exception to the general teaching on mortal sin or exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church, and so that person is not going to Hell?

Amoris Laetitia clearly presents such a rupture in at least two respects: First, it purports to change, not a mere ecclesiastical positive law, but an unchangeable Eucharistic discipline rooted in divine law and intrinsically connected to the integrity of the revealed truth concerning both the Real Presence and the indissolubility of sacramental marriage.


Yes and they did it with the new philosophical reasoning, the irrational premise  ( there are known cases of Catholics in mortal sin who are in Heaven or, there are known cases of Catholics in mortal sin on earth, who we know will go to Heaven because of certain subjective factors) and inference ( so the old moral teachings on mortal sin do not apply in reality any more since there are known exceptions).So there are no 'black and white' cases of sacrilege they would say. Since we do not know the 'fundamential option' of a person or whether he is an exception according to the three conditions of mortal sin mentioned in the Catechism.The bottom line is that there are known, objectively visible exceptions in the new moral theology. This point is not contested per se by Chris Ferrara.


 Second, it attempts to introduce into Catholic moral theology an absolutely inadmissible form of situation ethics, which the Magisterium has always condemned. 


It wrongly postulates situations or social conditions as being known exceptions to the traditional teachings on mortal sin.


Nor can it be argued that the faithful have no capacity to recognize these contradictions but rather must blindly presume that somehow they do not exist.

Lionel: Many of the faithful recognize it. Since they have not been trained at pontifical universities and seminaries in the new theology.They have not been 'conditioned'.

Christopher A. Ferrara

 This is the Catholic Church, whose deposit of Faith is objectively knowable, not a gnostic sect headed by the Oracle of Rome, who announces what “Jesus wants” today.


'whose deposit of Faith is objectively knowable'?

For Chris Ferrara the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance refer to known cases in the present times of people saved without the baptism of water. So they are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, according to Fr.Leonard Feeney and the 16th century Jesuit missionaries.

This is not true for me.

So the deposit of Faith is not objectively the same for the both of us.

For Chris Ferrara the three conditions of mortal sin mentioned in the Catechism edited by Cardinal Ratzinger and Cardinal Schonborn refer to hypothetical cases but which are objectively known .So they are exceptions to the traditional teaching on mortal sin.

This is not true for me.

So the deposit of Faith is not objectively the same for the both of us.

I follow Catholic faith and moral theology but without any known exceptions.So I am back to the old ecclesiology.

Chris Ferrara and Cardinal Schonborn follow a faith and moral theology with known exceptions to the traditional teaching.

Why doesn't Chris Ferrara come out and say like the 16th century missionaries that we do not know any exception to the traditional teaching on faith and morals ?

This would be a break with Cardinal Schonborn, Pope Benedict and and Pope Francis.
-Lionel Andrades


Amoris Laetitia: Anatomy of a Pontifical Debacle

Father Mathias Guadron, SSPX has got it right : there are no known exceptions to the traditional moral teachings.The new moral theology is based on an irrationality

No comments: