Posted by Father John George on November 24, 2016, 8:02 pm
The following open letter is from Bishop Athanasius Schneider, O.R.C., who is Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana, Kazakhstan and titular bishop of Celerina. --------
“We cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the truth” (2 Cor. 13: 8)
A Prophetic Voice of Four Cardinals of the Holy Roman Catholic Church
Out of “deep pastoral concern,” four Cardinals of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, His Eminence Joachim Meisner, Archbishop emeritus of Cologne (Germany), His Eminence Carlo Caffarra, Archbishop emeritus of Bologna (Italy), His Eminence Raymond Leo Burke, Patron of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, and His Eminence Walter Brandmüller, President emeritus of the Pontifical Commission of Historical Sciences, have published on November 14, 2016, the text of five questions, called dubia (Latin for “doubts”), which previously on September 19, 2016, they sent to the Holy Father and to Cardinal Gerhard Müller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, along with an accompanying letter. The Cardinals ask Pope Francis to clear up “grave disorientation and great confusion” concerning the interpretation and practical application, particularly of chapter VIII, of the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia and its passages relating to admission of remarried divorcees to the sacraments and the Church’s moral teaching.
In their statement entitled "Seeking Clarity: A Plea to Untie the Knots in Amoris Laetitia" the Cardinals say that to “many — bishops, priests, faithful — these paragraphs allude to or even explicitly teach a change in the discipline of the Church with respect to the divorced who are living in a new union.” Speaking so, the Cardinals have merely stated real facts in the life of the Church. These facts are demonstrated by pastoral orientations on behalf of several dioceses and by public statements of some bishops and cardinals, who affirm that in some cases divorced and remarried Catholics can be admitted to Holy Communion even though they continue to use the rights reserved by Divine law to validly married spouses.
In publishing a plea for clarity in a matter that touches the truth and the sanctity simultaneously of the three sacraments of Marriage, Penance, and the Eucharist, the Four Cardinals only did their basic duty as bishops and cardinals, which consists in actively contributing so that the revelation transmitted through the Apostles might be guarded sacredly and might be faithfully interpreted. It was especially the Second Vatican Council that reminded all the members of the college of bishops as legitimate successors of the Apostles of their obligation, according to which “by Christ's institution and command they have to be solicitous for the whole Church, and that this solicitude, though it is not exercised by an act of jurisdiction, contributes greatly to the advantage of the universal Church. For it is the duty of all bishops to promote and to safeguard the unity of faith and the discipline common to the whole Church” (Lumen gentium, 23; cf. also Christus Dominus, 5-6).
In making a public appeal to the Pope, bishops and cardinals should be moved by genuine collegial affection for the Successor of Peter and the Vicar of Christ on earth, following the teaching of Vatican Council II (cf. Lumen gentium, 22);, in so doing they render "service to the primatial ministry" of the Pope (cf. Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops, 13).
The entire Church in our days has to reflect upon the fact that the Holy Spirit has not in vain inspired Saint Paul to write in the Letter to the Galatians about the incident of his public correction of Peter. One has to trust that Pope Francis will accept this public appeal of the Four Cardinals in the spirit of the Apostle Peter, when St Paul offered him a fraternal correction for the good of the whole Church. May the words of that great Doctor of the Church, St Thomas Aquinas, illuminate and comfort us all: "When there is a danger for the faith, subjects are required to reprove their prelates, even publicly. Since Paul, who was subject to Peter, out of the danger of scandal, publicly reproved him. And Augustine comments: "Peter himself gave an example to superiors by not disdaining to be corrected by his subjects when it occurred to them that he had departed from the right path" (Summa theol., II-II, 33, 4c).
Pope Francis often calls for an outspoken and fearless dialogue between all members of the Church in matters concerning the spiritual good of souls. In the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia, the Pope speaks of a need for “open discussion of a number of doctrinal, moral, spiritual, and pastoral questions. The thinking of pastors and theologians, if faithful to the Church, honest, realistic and creative, will help us to achieve greater clarity” (n. 2). Furthermore, relationships at all levels within the Church must be free from a climate of fear and intimidation, as Pope Francis has requested in his various pronouncements.
In light of these pronouncements of Pope Francis and the principle of dialogue and acceptance of legitimate plurality of opinions, which was fostered by the documents of the Second Vatican Council, the unusually violent and intolerant reactions on behalf of some bishops and cardinals against the calm and circumspect plea of the Four Cardinals cause great astonishment. Among such intolerant reactions one could read affirmations such as, for instance: the four Cardinals are witless, naive, schismatic, heretical, and even comparable to the Arian heretics.
Such apodictic merciless judgments reveal not only intolerance, refusal of dialogue, and irrational rage, but demonstrate also a surrender to the impossibility of speaking the truth, a surrender to relativism in doctrine and practice, in faith and life. The above-mentioned clerical reaction against the prophetic voice of the Four Cardinals parades ultimately powerlessness before the eyes of the truth. Such a violent reaction has only one aim: to silence the voice of the truth, which is disturbing and annoying the apparently peaceful nebulous ambiguity of these clerical critics.
The negative reactions to the public statement of the Four Cardinals resemble the general doctrinal confusion of the Arian crisis in the fourth century. It is helpful to all to quote in the situation of the doctrinal confusion in our days some affirmations of Saint Hilary of Poitiers, the “Athanasius of the West”.
“You [the bishops of Gaul] who still remain with me faithful in Christ did not give way when threatened with the onset of heresy, and now by meeting that onset you have broken all its violence. Yes, brethren, you have conquered, to the abundant joy of those who share your faith: and your unimpaired constancy gained the double glory of keeping a pure conscience and giving an authoritative example” (Hil. De Syn., 3).
“Your [the bishops of Gaul] invincible faith keeps the honourable distinction of conscious worth and, content with repudiating crafty, vague, or hesitating action, safely abides in Christ, preserving the profession of its liberty. For since we all suffered deep and grievous pain at the actions of the wicked against God, within our boundaries alone is communion in Christ to be found from the time that the Church began to be harried by disturbances such as the expatriation of bishops, the deposition of priests, the intimidation of the people, the threatening of the faith, and the determination of the meaning of Christ’s doctrine by human will and power. Your resolute faith does not pretend to be ignorant of these facts or profess that it can tolerate them, perceiving that by the act of hypocritical assent it would bring itself before the bar of conscience” (Hil. De Syn., 4).
“I have spoken what I myself believed, conscious that I owed it as my soldier’s service to the Church to send to you in accordance with the teaching of the Gospel by these letters the voice of the office which I hold in Christ. It is yours to discuss, to provide and to act, that the inviolable fidelity in which you stand you may still keep with conscientious hearts, and that you may continue to hold what you hold now” (Hil. De Syn., 92).
The following words of Saint Basil the Great, addressed to the Latin Bishops, can be in some aspects applied to the situation of those who in our days ask for doctrinal clarity, including our Four Cardinals: “The one charge which is now sure to secure severe punishment is the careful keeping of the traditions of the Fathers. We are not being attacked for the sake of riches, or glory, or any temporal advantages. We stand in the arena to fight for our common heritage, for the treasure of the sound faith, derived from our Fathers. Grieve with us, all you who love the brethren, at the shutting of the mouths of our men of true religion, and at the opening of the bold and blasphemous lips of all that utter unrighteousness against God. The pillars and foundation of the truth are scattered abroad. We, whose insignificance has allowed of our being overlooked, are deprived of our right of free speech” (Ep. 243, 2.4).
Today those bishops and cardinals, who ask for clarity and who try to fulfill their duty in guarding sacredly and faithfully interpreting the transmitted Divine Revelation concerning the Sacraments of Marriage and the Eucharist, are no longer exiled as it was with the Nicene bishops during the Arian crisis. Contrary to the time of the Arian crisis, today, as wrote Rudolf Graber, the bishop of Ratisbone, in 1973, exile of the bishops is replaced by hush-up strategies and by slander campaigns (cf. Athanasius und die Kirche unserer Zeit, Abensberg 1973, p. 23).
Another champion of the Catholic faith during the Arian crisis was Saint Gregory Nazianzen. He wrote the following striking characterization of the behavior of the majority of the shepherds of the Church in those times. This voice of the great Doctor of the Church should be a salutary warning for the bishops of all times: "Surely the pastors have done foolishly; for, excepting a very few, who either on account of their insignificance were passed over, or who by reason of their virtue resisted, and who were to be left as a seed and root for the springing up again and revival of Israel by the influences of the Spirit, all temporized, only differing from each other in this, that some succumbed earlier, and others later; some were foremost champions and leaders in the impiety, and others joined the second rank of the battle, being overcome by fear, or by interest, or by flattery, or, what was the most excusable, by their own ignorance" (Orat. 21, 24).
When Pope Liberius in 357 signed one of the so called formulas of Sirmium, in which he deliberately discarded the dogmatically defined expression “homo-ousios” and excommunicated Saint Athanasius in order to have peace and harmony with the Arian and Semi-Arian bishops of the East, faithful Catholics and some few bishops, especially Saint Hilary of Poitiers, were deeply shocked. Saint Hilary transmitted the letter that Pope Liberius wrote to the Oriental bishops, announcing the acceptance of the formula of Sirmium and the excommunication of Saint Athanasius. In his deep pain and dismay, Saint Hilary added to the letter in a kind of desperation the phrase: “Anathema tibi a me dictum, praevaricator Liberi” (I say to you anathema, prevaricator Liberius), cf. Denzinger-Schönmetzer, n. 141. Pope Liberius wanted to have peace and harmony at any price, even at the expense of the Divine truth. In his letter to the heterodox Latin bishops Ursace, Valence, and Germinius announcing to them the above-mentioned decisions, he wrote that he preferred peace and harmony to martyrdom (cf. cf. Denzinger-Schönmetzer, n. 142).
“In what a dramatic contrast stood the behavior of Pope Liberius to the following conviction of Saint Hilary of Poitiers: “We don’t make peace at the expense of the truth by making concessions in order to acquire the reputation of tolerance. We make peace by fighting legitimately according to the rules of the Holy Spirit. There is a danger to ally surreptitiously with unbelief under the beautiful name of peace.” (Hil. Ad Const., 2, 6, 2).
Blessed John Henry Newman commented on these unusual sad facts with the following wise and equilibrated affirmation: “While it is historically true, it is in no sense doctrinally false, that a Pope, as a private doctor, and much more Bishops, when not teaching formally, may err, as we find they did err in the fourth century. Pope Liberius might sign a Eusebian formula at Sirmium, and the mass of Bishops at Ariminum or elsewhere, and yet they might, in spite of this error, be infallible in their ex cathedra decisions” (The Arians of the Fourth Century, London, 1876, p. 465).
The Four Cardinals with their prophetic voice demanding doctrinal and pastoral clarity have a great merit before their own conscience, before history, and before the innumerable simple faithful Catholics of our days, who are driven to the ecclesiastical periphery, because of their fidelity to Christ’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage. But above all, the Four Cardinals have a great merit in the eyes of Christ. Because of their courageous voice, their names will shine brightly at the Last Judgment. For they obeyed the voice of their conscience remembering the words of Saint Paul: “We cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the truth” (2 Cor 13: 8). Surely, at the Last Judgment the above-mentioned mostly clerical critics of the Four Cardinals will not have an easy answer for their violent attack on such a just, worthy, and meritorious act of these Four Members of the Sacred College of Cardinals.
The following words inspired by the Holy Spirit retain their prophetic value especially in view of the spreading doctrinal and practical confusion regarding the Sacrament of Marriage in our days: “For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry” (2 Tim. 4: 3-5).
May all, who in our days still take seriously their baptismal vows and their priestly and episcopal promises, receive the strength and the grace of God so that they may reiterate together with Saint Hilary the words: “May I always be in exile, if only the truth begins to be preached again!” (De Syn., 78). This strength and grace we wish wholeheartedly to our Four Cardinals and as well as to those who criticize them.
November 23, 2016
+ Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
Re: Bishop Schneider's Key points
Posted by PDH on November 25, 2016, 7:38 am, in reply to "aaaaand"
NOV. 24, 2016 Bishop Schneider: ‘Dubia’ Cardinals Are a Prophetic Voice and Doing Their Duty Draws on historical precedent during Arian heresy and says the viciousness of their critics is aimed at "silencing the voice of truth". Edward Pentin
Bishop Schneider’s key points are listed below: • In the Dubia, the Cardinals have merely stated real facts in the life of the Church. • The Four Cardinals only did their basic duty as bishops and cardinals, which consists in actively contributing so that the revelation transmitted through the Apostles might be guarded sacredly and might be faithfully interpreted. • In making a public appeal to the Pope, bishops and cardinals should be moved by genuine collegial affection for the Successor of Peter and the Vicar of Christ on earth, following the teaching of Vatican Council II (cf. Lumen gentium, 22). • One has to trust that Pope Francis will accept this public appeal of the Four Cardinals in the spirit of the Apostle Peter, when St Paul offered him a fraternal correction for the good of the whole Church. • [Quoting St. Thomas Aquinas]: "When there is a danger for the faith, subjects are required to reprove their prelates, even publicly. Since Paul, who was subject to Peter, out of the danger of scandal, publicly reproved him. And Augustine comments: 'Peter himself gave an example to superiors by not disdaining to be corrected by his subjects when it occurred to them that he had departed from the right path'" (Summa theol., II-II, 33, 4c). • The Pope speaks of a need for “open discussion of a number of doctrinal, moral, spiritual, and pastoral questions. The thinking of pastors and theologians, if faithful to the Church, honest, realistic and creative, will help us to achieve greater clarity.” • The unusually violent and intolerant reactions on behalf of some bishops and cardinals against the calm and circumspect plea of the Four Cardinals [has caused] great astonishment. • Such apodictic merciless judgments reveal not only intolerance, refusal of dialogue, and irrational rage, but demonstrate also a surrender to the impossibility of speaking the truth, a surrender to relativism in doctrine and practice, in faith and life. • The above-mentioned clerical reaction against the prophetic voice of the Four Cardinals parades ultimately powerlessness before the eyes of the truth. Such a violent reaction has only one aim: to silence the voice of the truth, which is disturbing and annoying the apparently peaceful nebulous ambiguity of these clerical critics. • The negative reactions to the public statement of the Four Cardinals resemble the general doctrinal confusion of the Arian crisis in the fourth century. • The Four Cardinals with their prophetic voice demanding doctrinal and pastoral clarity have a great merit before their own conscience, before history, and before the innumerable simple faithful Catholics of our days, who are driven to the ecclesiastical periphery, because of their fidelity to Christ’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage. • Above all, the Four Cardinals have a great merit in the eyes of Christ. Because of their courageous voice, their names will shine brightly at the Last Judgment.
Re: The dissent of Pope Francis flows from the likes of Bernard Haring
Thu Nov 24, 2016 - 1:55 pm EST Francis praises major Humanae Vitae dissenter in rebuke of ‘white or black’ morality Pete Baklinski ROME, November 24, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – Pope Francis has praised the 1960s German moral theologian Bernard Häring, one of the most prominent dissenters from Pope Paul VI’s 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae, for his new morality which the pope said helped “moral theology to flourish.”
"I think Bernard Häring was the first to start looking for a new way to help moral theology to flourish again," he said in comments, published today by La Civiltà Cattolica, that were given during a dialogue with the Jesuit order which was gathered for its 36th general Congregation on October 24, 2016 in Rome.
Pope Francis gave his comments while answering a question about a morality he has often spoken about based on “discernment.”
“Discernment is the key element: the capacity for discernment. I note the absence of discernment in the formation of priests. We run the risk of getting used to 'white or black,' to that which is legal. We are rather closed, in general, to discernment. One thing is clear: today, in a certain number of seminaries, a rigidity that is far from a discernment of situations has been introduced. And that is dangerous, because it can lead us to a conception of morality that has a casuistic sense,” he said.
Francis criticized what he called a “decadent scholasticism” that his generation was educated in, that provoked what he called a “casuistic attitude” towards morality.
“The whole moral sphere was restricted to ‘you can,’ ‘you cannot,’ ‘up to here yes but not there,’” he said.
“It was a morality very foreign to ‘discernment,’" he said, adding that Bernard Häring was the “first to start looking for a new way to help moral theology to flourish again.” Fr. Bernard Häring (1912-98) was a key figure during the Second Vatican Council, where he applied the principle of the evolution of dogma (as found in the nouvelle théologie) to morality.
According to Professor Roberto de Mattei, this “new morality” championed by Häring ultimately “den[ied] the existence of an absolute and immutable natural law.”
Häring was first appointed an “expert” at Vatican II and then later became the secretary of the Commission on the modern world, where, according to de Mattei, he became one of the primary architects of the document Gaudium et Spes (Joy and Hope), part of which deals with marriage. According to de Mattei, a vicious battle was waged during the crafting of this document between the progressive and traditional minorities over procreation in marriage.
“This battle went beyond the pill to include the ends of marriage. At issue was the very basis of natural law itself,” he said in a talk given at the Rome Life Forum in 2015.
The progressive element, backed by Häring, eventually prevailed upon Pope Paul VI to leave aside the question of contraception in the document, according to de Mattei.
“The most surprising aspect of Gaudium et Spes, however, is the lack of any presentation of the traditional order of the ends of marriage, the primary and the secondary….The institution of marriage, therefore, is defined without any reference to children and only as an intimate community of conjugal life. Moreover, in the succeeding paragraphs, conjugal love is discussed first (paragraph 49) and procreation second (paragraph 50),” said de Mattei.
After Paul VI released Humanae Vitae in 1968 where he taught unequivocally that “each and every marriage act must remain open to the transmission of human life” and called the use of contraception “intrinsically wrong,” Häring spent his energy in criticizing not only Paul VI, but also Pope John Paul II, for their stances on birth control and other sexual issues.
Häring was eventually investigated by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in the 1970s for his 1972 book Medical Ethics, where he presents a concept of health that would allow a couple to use contraception if they deemed it the best means to help them fulfill their total vocation, a principle condemned in Humanae Vitae.
Häring became the mentor of Charles Curran, a dissident Catholic priest who aggressively condemned the Church’s teachings on matters such as abortion, contraception, and homosexuality. Curran, who was also investigated by the CDF in the late 1970s and early 1980s, was officially prohibited by Pope John Paul II in 1986 from teaching at any Catholic school and was stripped of the title ‘Catholic theologian.’
Francis called it an “important task” of the Society of Jesus that they “form seminarians and priests in the morality of ‘discernment.’” It was using the method of “discernment” in response to the Zika virus scare earlier this year that Pope Francis appeared to condone the use of contraception for married couples living in affected areas as the “lesser of two evils.” Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi confirmed the pope’s words the following day, stating: “The contraceptive or condom, in particular cases of emergency or gravity, could be the object of ‘discernment’ in a serious case of conscience. This is what the Pope said.” Critics said the pope’s move contradicted previous Catholic teaching (see here, here, and here).
Pope Francis also spoke about the morality of “discernment” in his April exhortation Amoris Laetitia more than thirty times, using the term as a key to opening the door to Holy Communion for Catholics living in adulterous situations. Immediately following the “smoking footnote” 351, in which critics say the pope allowed the divorced and remarried to receive Holy Communion, the pope writes that “discernment must help to find possible ways of responding to God and growing in the midst of limits.”
Four cardinals have recently asked the pope to clarify key passages in the exhortation, asking him a set of five yes-or-no questions regarding the indissolubility of marriage, the existence of absolute moral norms, and the role of conscience in making decisions. They went public with their “dubia” last week after the pope failed to reply.
During his dialogue with the Jesuits, Pope Francis noted the progress that has been made in moral theology since the days of “you can, you cannot.”
“Obviously, in our day moral theology has made much progress in its reflections and in its maturity,” he said.
When will you wake up, Father George...
Posted by Brian Coyne on November 25, 2016, 10:26 pm, in reply to "aaaaand"
when 95% of the adult-baptised have ceased listening and participating;
or perhaps 98%;
or when you rock up to the Last Judgement and are asked to explain what "bringing the 'good news' to ALL of humankind" – and not just to some pharisee remnant of self-appointed "chosen ones" – actually means;
or when hell freezes over?
It really is hilarious listening to the likes of yourself and these other self-appointed leaders of the remnant who believe they are the "chosen ones" exclusively appointed by none other than Almighty God himself to interpret God's mind and laws. I ask again: when are any of you going to finally wake up and come to your senses?
You know, the self-deceiving act of attributing to others the faults one wishes to deny in one’s self.
The most encouraging thing about your rant is that you seem to still believe in Judgment Day. I had been convinced that you had dispensed with that inconvenient truth along with all the other unpalatable parts of Catholicism in setting up your particular belief cafeteria.
And you are still fixated on the numbers! Unbelievable! If something is wrong, it makes not the slightest difference how many deluded souls embrace it – it is still wrong! You are incapable of realising, or acknowledging, that the soul does not live in a democracy. The Almighty is under no compulsion to cave in to the popular vote. It is astounding that you cling to that belief. At the Judgment Seat, which you still refer to when convenient, it is the “95% of the adult-baptised (who) have ceased listening and participating” who will find that the specious reasoning that floats around in your domain is seriously deficient.
Catastrophically deficient!
We are told that those who instruct many unto Justice will shine as stars for all Eternity. I think that implies that those who lead many unto heresy will have something else in store for them. Perhaps you should think a bit more deeply about Judgment.
Either that, or hope that hell really does freeze over.
“…the likes of yourself and these other self-appointed leaders of the remnant who believe they are the "chosen ones" exclusively appointed by none other than Almighty God himself to interpret God's mind and laws.”
To which the Christ, Almighty God Himself, supplied the correction and the ultimate answer: "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). http://www.catholic.com/tracts/origins-of-peter-as-pope
So the “self-appointed” are the Coynes of this world, self-chosen, and myopic to Christ’s chosen Peter who declared that “In these epistles there are certain things difficult to understand, which the unlearned and the unstable distort, just as they do the rest of the Scriptures also, to their own destruction.” (II Peter 3:16).
There will come a time when they will not endure sound doctrine, but, having itching ears, will heap to themselves teachers after their own desires, and will be turned away from truth into fables.
For nearly two millennia, we had truth. Then in the last four or five decades, the itching ears syndrome became pandemic, and peddlers of fables arose in response, some even having the effrontery to include the word "Catholic" in the names of their forums.
--Previous Message-- : “…the likes of yourself and these other : self-appointed leaders of the remnant who : believe they are the "chosen ones" : exclusively appointed by none other than : Almighty God himself to interpret God's mind : and laws.” : : To which the Christ, Almighty God Himself, : supplied the correction and the ultimate : answer: : "You are Peter, and on this rock I will : build My Church, and the gates of hell will : not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). : : http://www.catholic.com/tracts/origins-of-peter-as-pope : : So the “self-appointed” are the Coynes of : this world, self-chosen, and myopic to : Christ’s chosen Peter who declared that “In : these epistles there are certain things : difficult to understand, which the unlearned : and the unstable distort, just as they do : the rest of the Scriptures also, to their : own destruction.” (II Peter 3:16). : : : :
ease up o righteous infullabull one 2 phitisof coyne below in action
--Previous Message-- : : https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/francis-praises-prominent-humanae-vitae-dissenter-for-his-radical-new-moral : : Thu Nov 24, 2016 - 1:55 pm EST : Francis praises major Humanae Vitae : dissenter in rebuke of ‘white or black’ : morality : Pete Baklinski : ROME, November 24, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – : Pope Francis has praised the 1960s German : moral theologian Bernard Häring, one of the : most prominent dissenters from Pope Paul : VI’s 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae, for his : new morality which the pope said helped : “moral theology to flourish.” : : "I think Bernard Häring was the first : to start looking for a new way to help moral : theology to flourish again," he said in : comments, published today by La Civiltà : Cattolica, that were given during a dialogue : with the Jesuit order which was gathered for : its 36th general Congregation on October 24, : 2016 in Rome. : : Pope Francis gave his comments while : answering a question about a morality he has : often spoken about based on “discernment.” : : “Discernment is the key element: the : capacity for discernment. I note the absence : of discernment in the formation of priests. : We run the risk of getting used to 'white or : black,' to that which is legal. We are : rather closed, in general, to discernment. : One thing is clear: today, in a certain : number of seminaries, a rigidity that is far : from a discernment of situations has been : introduced. And that is dangerous, because : it can lead us to a conception of morality : that has a casuistic sense,” he said. : : Francis criticized what he called a : “decadent scholasticism” that his generation : was educated in, that provoked what he : called a “casuistic attitude” towards : morality. : : “The whole moral sphere was restricted to : ‘you can,’ ‘you cannot,’ ‘up to here yes but : not there,’” he said. : : “It was a morality very foreign to : ‘discernment,’" he said, adding that : Bernard Häring was the “first to start : looking for a new way to help moral theology : to flourish again.” : Fr. Bernard Häring (1912-98) was a key : figure during the Second Vatican Council, : where he applied the principle of the : evolution of dogma (as found in the nouvelle : théologie) to morality. : : According to Professor Roberto de Mattei, : this “new morality” championed by Häring : ultimately “den[ied] the existence of an : absolute and immutable natural law.” : : Häring was first appointed an “expert” at : Vatican II and then later became the : secretary of the Commission on the modern : world, where, according to de Mattei, he : became one of the primary architects of the : document Gaudium et Spes (Joy and Hope), : part of which deals with marriage. : According to de Mattei, a vicious battle was : waged during the crafting of this document : between the progressive and traditional : minorities over procreation in marriage. : : “This battle went beyond the pill to include : the ends of marriage. At issue was the very : basis of natural law itself,” he said in a : talk given at the Rome Life Forum in 2015. : : The progressive element, backed by Häring, : eventually prevailed upon Pope Paul VI to : leave aside the question of contraception in : the document, according to de Mattei. : : “The most surprising aspect of Gaudium et : Spes, however, is the lack of any : presentation of the traditional order of the : ends of marriage, the primary and the : secondary….The institution of marriage, : therefore, is defined without any reference : to children and only as an intimate : community of conjugal life. Moreover, in the : succeeding paragraphs, conjugal love is : discussed first (paragraph 49) and : procreation second (paragraph 50),” said de : Mattei. : : After Paul VI released Humanae Vitae in 1968 : where he taught unequivocally that “each and : every marriage act must remain open to the : transmission of human life” and called the : use of contraception “intrinsically wrong,” : Häring spent his energy in criticizing not : only Paul VI, but also Pope John Paul II, : for their stances on birth control and other : sexual issues. : : Häring was eventually investigated by the : Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith : (CDF) in the 1970s for his 1972 book Medical : Ethics, where he presents a concept of : health that would allow a couple to use : contraception if they deemed it the best : means to help them fulfill their total : vocation, a principle condemned in Humanae : Vitae. : : Häring became the mentor of Charles Curran, : a dissident Catholic priest who aggressively : condemned the Church’s teachings on matters : such as abortion, contraception, and : homosexuality. Curran, who was also : investigated by the CDF in the late 1970s : and early 1980s, was officially prohibited : by Pope John Paul II in 1986 from teaching : at any Catholic school and was stripped of : the title ‘Catholic theologian.’ : : Francis called it an “important task” of the : Society of Jesus that they “form seminarians : and priests in the morality of : ‘discernment.’” : It was using the method of “discernment” in : response to the Zika virus scare earlier : this year that Pope Francis appeared to : condone the use of contraception for married : couples living in affected areas as the : “lesser of two evils.” Vatican spokesman Fr. : Federico Lombardi confirmed the pope’s words : the following day, stating: “The : contraceptive or condom, in particular cases : of emergency or gravity, could be the object : of ‘discernment’ in a serious case of : conscience. This is what the Pope said.” : Critics said the pope’s move contradicted : previous Catholic teaching (see here, here, : and here). : : Pope Francis also spoke about the morality : of “discernment” in his April exhortation : Amoris Laetitia more than thirty times, : using the term as a key to opening the door : to Holy Communion for Catholics living in : adulterous situations. Immediately following : the “smoking footnote” 351, in which critics : say the pope allowed the divorced and : remarried to receive Holy Communion, the : pope writes that “discernment must help to : find possible ways of responding to God and : growing in the midst of limits.” : : Four cardinals have recently asked the pope : to clarify key passages in the exhortation, : asking him a set of five yes-or-no questions : regarding the indissolubility of marriage, : the existence of absolute moral norms, and : the role of conscience in making decisions. : They went public with their “dubia” last : week after the pope failed to reply. : : During his dialogue with the Jesuits, Pope : Francis noted the progress that has been : made in moral theology since the days of : “you can, you cannot.” : : “Obviously, in our day moral theology has : made much progress in its reflections and in : its maturity,” he said. : :
No, not the wind, but gasps of Coynestonishment: "You just can't help some people! Take that TC mob - I did my best to turn them aside from Salvation and set them firmly on the path to Perdition, but they just won't go!! I give up."