Tuesday, 19 April 2016

Christopher Ferrara's "devastating critique" of Amoris Laetitia

It's taken more than a week. With the legal mind and logic of sound argument, Christopher Ferrara dissects and analysis the Apostolic Exhortation from the two Synods with a devastating accuracy displaying a sound Catholic mind and heart filled with love and truth and sorrow for what has befallen us all.


Monday, April 18, 2016

Amoris Laetitia: Anatomy of a Pontifical Debacle Featured

Written by  
Rate this item
(34 votes)
635787944691218460 EPA USA POPE FRANCIS VISITEditor's Note: This is the REVISED AND EXPANDED WEB VERSION of Mr. Ferrara's article by the same name which appears in the current print-edition of The Remnant. We've decided to post it here in its entirety due to the gravity of its subject matter and to the fact that it may well be our most definitive exposé of Pope Francis and his agenda to permanently change the Church. It gives us no joy to publish this devastating critique of the 'Joy of Love'. In fact, we regard it as nothing less than the heartbreaking duty of loyal sons of the Church who can see no alternative but to resist. Please pray for Pope Francis and for our beloved Catholic Church under obvious siegeMJM
No difficulty can arise that justifies the putting aside of the law of God which forbids all acts intrinsically evil. There is no possible circumstance in which husband and wife cannot, strengthened by the grace of God, fulfill faithfully their duties and preserve in wedlock their chastity unspotted. -Pius XI, Casti Connubii


Fatimite said...

As usual Mr. Ferrara is clear and succinct in his assessment. We are in dire times, folks. The level of deception in this "pontificate" is absolutely frightening.

Today is the 11th Anniversary of the election of Benedict XVI of beloved memory.

If you want to take part in an experiment pull up a clip of his election and compare it with what happened in March of 2013. Am I the only one who notices the striking but yet subtle symbolic differences? It is like a comparison between day and night, light and darkness.

May God have mercy on us all, but especially those sheep within the fold who blindly follow the ravenous wolves on the way to eternal ruin.

Catholic Mission said...

Christopher Ferrara who knows Italian may have watched the Press Conference for Amoris Laetitia when Cardinal Schonborn referred to 1) the hermeneutic of continuity of Pope Benedict and 2) the development of doctrine.
He was referring to a specific moral theology which has a particular form of reasoning.
There is no reference to this in this article by Ferrara.
Cardinal Schonborn was drawing upon the same error in salvation theology, which is accepted by the traditionalists and conservative Catholics, including Chris Ferrara.
So Ferrara may have not noticed the new theology which the liberals use and is the basis of the new doctrines in Amoris Laetitia.

In the new moral theology, which is part of Amoris Laetitia it is assumed that we humans can judge when a Catholic living in adultery ( concubinage) will not go to Hell, if they die immediately.So there are known exceptions to the traditional teaching on mortal sin.

Similarly for Chris Ferrara and Cardinal Schonborn the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance refer to known exceptions to the 16th century missionaries interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Ferrara has not said that if a Catholic priest assumes we cannot know of any case of a couple living in mortal sin,who would be an exception, who would not go to Hell,this would be the end of the new moral theology,it would not apply any more.

1.Since in the new moral theology it is assumed that there are known exceptions, to Catholics living in mortal sin( concubinage, adultery) there is a hermeneutic of rupture with the traditional teaching on mortal sin, which did not mention any personally known exceptions.This point is omitted by Ferrara.

Since there are known exceptions to traditional mortal sin there is a development of doctrine on mortal sin.Theoretically mortal sin is accepted but in practise it is believed we cannot always judge any case, because of subjective factors, which are always known exceptions, to saying someone in particular is in mortal sin.This point is covered in the article.How it is not seen by Chris Ferrara that the real problem is with known exceptions.
Theoretically we can postulate that there are exceptions but in reality, pastorally we cannot say that any couple is an exception.

In the new salvation theology the baptism of desire is theoretical.However when the Letter(1949) considered it an exception to EENS it became explicit and personally known. It would have to be personally known to be an exception to EENS.
Similalry in the new moral theology the exceptions to mortal sin mentioned in the Catechism of the Catholic Church are theoretical.However when Amoris Laeitia considers them as being exceptions to the traditional teachings on mortal sin, they become explicit.They are assumed to be explicit.

But how can the conditions for mortal sin and the baptism of desire be explicit for us human beings?

This is the flaw in the new theology, in faith and morals. This point is omitted in Ferrara's critique.

So if Cardinal Schonborn did not assume that there were 'subjectively visible exceptions', i.e you could see through the mind and heart of someone,as if you were God, then there would not be known-to-you-exceptions to mortal sin?

3.So Amoris Laetitia (301) is based on personally knowing exceptions to the traditional teaching on mortal sin and this point has not been noticed by Chris Ferrara.
-Lionel Andrades

Anonymous said...


Patrick Archbold also had an article on the Remnant website. This may help you:



fila said...

@ Catholic Mission
Why dont you send your observations to Mr Ferrara so he could improve his article? It would benefit many, I think. God bless. P.

Catholic Mission said...

Patrick Archbold also had an article on the Remnant website. This may help you:

Patrick Archbald too has missed the point.
He says the document is a lie.
But why is it a lie,what is the precise theological error to make it a lie?

Schonborn would say there is a development since there are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and there are exceptions to mortal sin.
Both Patrick and Chris would agree with him!
There are exceptions for all of them!
There were exceptions for Archbishop Lefebvre. There are still exceptions for the SSPX bishop.
Did you notice that Cardinal Burke said that AL was based on the general teachings of the Church.
While Pope Francis praised Cardinal Schonborn for his theology.
Patrick Archbold and Chris Ferrara are using the new theology.
So they cannot see through the basic error.
AL says there are known exceptions to the traditional understanding of mortal sin (301).
I say there are no known exceptions. There cannot be known exceptions for us human beings.
Similarly on faith ( salvation) I say there are no known exceptions in 2016 to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This is not a personal view. This is common sense.
Here are in this link some of the people who agree with me.

Archbishop Thomas Gullickson, John Martigioni and Fr.Rev. Fr.P. Stefano Visintin OSB, Dean of the Faculty of Theology at the Pontifical University St.Anselm agree with me : there are no visible exceptions.

-Lionel Andrades

Fr.Hunwicke and Pat Archbald are not aware of the irrational premise and conclusion in AL 301.
Fr.John Hunwicke and Patrick Archbold expect the SSPX to also compromise the Faith with the irrational premise and conclusion

Without the irrational premise i.e known exceptions to mortal sin, knowing who will go to Heaven inspite of being in mortal sin.
So the real issue with extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II is whether you are interpreting them with or without the irrational premise

AL's known exceptions moral theology is part of the policy at EWTN and NCR. He Cardinal Burke and Joseph Shaw(LMS Chairman) accept it.
EWTN's website like the NCR editorial policy assumes the dead in Heaven are living and visible exceptions to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney

It's a lie to say that there are known exceptions to the traditional teaching on salvation and morals and then to make a new theology based on this lie.
Dan Burke,Jeanette DeMelo' s NCR Editorial policy promotes a lie

Bishop Robert J.Baker approves the irrational interpretation of EWTN/NCR speakers and writers ?

Anonymous said...

Good idea. I'm sure he'd appreciate it.

Catholic Mission said...

Chris Ferrara does not respond to the e-mails I send him. Neither does he respond to my comments or questions on the Remnant Newspaper, before they are deleted.

Here are two more reports:

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

We cannot say in any specific case that one knows that someone living in mortal sin will not go to Hell and has Sanctifying Grace.