Tuesday, May 10, 2016

PODCAzT 146: Spinello: Does Amoris Laetitia Retreat from Absolute Moral Norms?

PODCAzT 146: Spinello: Does Amoris Laetitia Retreat from Absolute Moral Norms?


I direct the readership’s attention to a piece at Crisisabout Amoris laetitia, the controversial and ambiguous Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation… that is, if any of you still care to read about it.
Or listen to it!  Hopefully busy priests and seminarians will benefit from being able to hear it as well as read it.

Richard A. Spinello, Associate Research Professor at Boston College and a member of the adjunct faculty at St. John’s Seminary in Boston. asks: Does Amoris Laetitia Retreat from Absolute Moral Norms?
He sets the stage:
We can begin to better appreciate the potential problems with Amoris Laetitia if we recall why Pope John Paul II felt it necessary to devote a whole encyclical [Veritatis splendor – which is not cited in AL] to the theme of moral theology and natural law. Many encyclicals written by John Paul II’s predecessors dealt with specific moral issues, but John Paul II was more concerned about the proper foundation of moral theology. After Vatican II,  dissent on moral issues was rampant in the Catholic Church. [Afterwhat?  After Vatican II?  I’m shocked.] Moral theologians proposed novel theories such as the “fundamental option,” which claimed that a single evil act need not reverse one’s “option” for God and therefore could not be classified as a mortal sin. They promoted proportionalism—making moral choices based on whatever option yields the optimal proportion of benefits to harms. Reflecting the postmodern flight from truth and certitude, they discarded the doctrine of specific moral absolutes in favor of formal norms such as “Love your neighbor.” [All you need is love, love… love is all you need!] John Paul II witnessed the confusion spread by the revisionists and decided to intervene by writing this encyclical in 1993. The philosopher-pope dissected the shallow arguments underlying these new theories with exquisite care.
Most U.S. Catholic seminaries have been faithful to the traditional doctrines reinforced by Veritatis Splendor. Of course, there has been residual discord at a number of Catholic universities. Some moral theologians continued to teach and defend these revisionist creeds such as the fundamental option.
That helps to put AL in a context.   Going on…
[QUAERITUR…] But what will happen to moral theology in the wake of Amoris Laetitia,which seems to disregard and perhaps even oppose the highly principled reasoning ofVeritatis Splendor? Will more moral theologians and clergy come to see that encyclical as an irrelevant relic of the John Paul II papacy? [I think that it was part of the agenda of the managers of the last two Synods to frame John Paul’s magisterium as something that belongs to the past and as no longer relevant.]
Supporters of Pope Francis’s approach to moral theology might contend that Amoris Laetitia does not rebuke the work of his predecessor. This may be true, but the language of this exhortation, especially in Chapter Eight, seems to suggest that Pope Francis is distancing himself from St. John Paul II.  It seems likely that some theologians will perceive Francis’s exhortation as a vindication of the revisionist moraltheologyVeritatis Splendor sought to dismantle. In an article called “In Good Conscience,” one moral theologian has already proclaimed that Pope Francis “clearly believes there are few, if any, ‘one-size-fits-all’ concrete absolute norms.” He also applauds the expansive role for conscience presented in the exhortation.  [It’s in Jesuit-run Amerika Magazine.  Are you surprised?]
The writer goes on to show how the use of Aquinas in AL doesn’t hold up very well.
Be sure to tune your ears for his explanation of the fundamental  option (which is wrong), proportionalism (which is wrong). Also, listen for his explanation of absolute moral norms. Finally, follow carefully his own exposition of Thomas Aquinas which show the flaw in how Aquinas is employed in AL.
Amoris Laetitia fails to point out the critical distinction between different types of moral norms.
I hope this might be of use especially to busy priests and seminarians  who may be able to listen to it on their way to class or while running  or driving somewhere.
Gentlemen, we need to know this stuff inside and out.

The Vatican is presenting a corrupt moral theology based on the Charles Curran and Richard Cushing errors.
The Holy See's Press Office is promoting Fr.Charles Curran's moral theology.It is also making the same error as Cardinal Richard Cushing on the issue of salvation.
There are two views in moral theology.
Amoris Laetitia is the official approval of the new moral theology based on hypothetical cases being objectively known exceptions and exceptions make the rule : it supports the errors of Fr.Charles Curran

Amoris Laetitia (AL) has the error of subjectivism which is also there in Vatican Council II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Letter of the Holy Office and the Baltimore and Pius X catechisms
Amoris Laetitia (AL) continues with the factual error in the catechisms after the Catechism of the Council of Trent.The error is also there in Vatican Council II.
Cushingism is not part of the whole Tradition of the Church. Cardinal Burke interprets Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS with Cushingism: Amoris Laetitia is based on the new moral theology, the heretical theology.
Traditionalists and sedevacantists need to affirm Catholic moral and salvation theology by avoiding the irrational inference, the mix up between what is visible and invisible.
St. Catherine of Siena On Hell 

  • The new theology was used to justify liberal dispensations and annulments.This is the practical 'exceptions factory' that we all know of: Amoris Laetitia officially approves this
    So there cannot be any known case of someone saved who is living in mortal sin. Similarly there cannot be any known case of someone saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance without the baptism of water
    How easily annulments and dispensations are given and now Amoris Laetitia offers another Church-approved means to strike at the family




      From ABC News:

      A statue of the Virgin Mary in Fresno [given to a woman on Mother's Day a decade ago] appears to be weeping. The family who owns the statue calls it a miracle and said it's been happening for a while.

      To the faithful, Maria Cardenas said the statue of the Virgin Mary is a blessing. Tears seem to well up in her right eye and stream down her face to her chin.

      A statue of the Virgin Mary in Fresno appears to be weeping. The family who owns the statue calls it a miracle and said it's been happening for a while.

      To the faithful, Maria Cardenas said the statue of the Virgin Mary is a blessing. Tears seem to well up in her right eye and stream down her face to her chin.

      Cardenas said it's beautiful the way she looks right now. Every tear, she said, is nothing short of a miracle. So she collects them in a glass and shares them with those who find their way to this home.

      A lot of people come and they can't believe it, she said, but they come with faith.

      "I wanted to come see for myself," said Richard Quintana, neighbor.

      Quintana just moved in across the street and he was invited in to take a look, for the first time.

      "That's amazing. It takes the words out of my mouth-- like wow. I'm so amazed," said Quintana.

      Cardenas said I don't understand why she's doing it but it's something good.
      She said the statue was a Mother's Day gift she received 10 years ago almost to the day. But it didn't start weeping, she said until a year and a half ago when her cousin, Jessie Lopez, was murdered.

      Sometimes she doesn't cry for weeks or months Cardenas said, but when she starts, she will cry again.

      Action News cameras watched one of the tears fall. It was oily and smelled like roses. And another tear immediately started building up.

      One man, who didn't want to be identified is the statue's caretaker. He said people have tried to figure it out but have only come up with one explanation.

      "We've had priests come from all over to look at her, and all they say is that it's a miracle."

      At this house the Virgin Mary statue weeps, or so it seems, for anyone to see, not just the faithful.

      "We're not hiding her, but at the same time, we don't want anything to happen to her,' said the caretaker.

      The people who live at the house said the door is open to anyone. They don't want to give the address, but if you are invited, you are welcome inside.


      The doctrinal tube is not empty if the premises are avoided

      Musings of a Pertinacious PapistComments from the blog Musings of a Pertinacious Papist :What was Cardinal Schönborn thinking?

      Anonymous said...
      So perhaps the next stage of "organic development" is to accept the fact that conversion is an outmoded concept in the salvation biz. The doctrinal tube is empty

      I would not use this analogy.Since we cannot put the toothpaste back in the tube.
      Image result for Photos of sheep outside a  barn
      I would say that the sheep are not in the barn.They can enter the barn in future.
      We must be aware of the false premise used to project the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance as being exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). Once we eliminate the premise, we are back to the old doctrine.The sheep, Catholics, then have only the old ecclesiology before them.
      1.The premise is that there are known cases in the present times of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance.
      2.The premise is that these known cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance exclude the baptism of water.
      3.So the conclusion is that there are known exceptions to the dogma EENS and so not every one needs to be a formal member of the Church any more.
      4.Instead theology must now be Christological and it can no more be an exclusivist ecclesiology. It is Jesus without the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church.
      Once we interpret Vatican Council II or the dogma EEENS without the premise ( 1 and 2) we eliminate also the conclusion ( 3 and 4).
      It means Catholics are back to the old 'rigorist' interpretation of the dogma EENS, the Feeneyite version.This is the conclusion.
      Image result for Photos of sheep inside a   barn
      It also means there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the Feeneyite version of EENS, since without the irrational premise,LG 16 etc are not visible but invisible for us.
      The sheep will know the correct way to go to the barn and how to remain there.The confusion will be removed.
      -Lionel Andrades