Catholics owe a debt of gratitude to and prayers for Dr. Shaw and the other signatories who have the faith, intellectual rigour, true charity, and clarity of thought to state the dangers of Amoris Laetitia.
With the permission of Joseph Shaw, one of the groups signatories and spokesman. I print the following.
Dear all,In light of the appearance of the signatories and the text of the Appeal to the Cardinals online, the organisers of the appeal are issuing a press release, below.
The appeal and its covering letter can conveniently be seen here:
http://www.onepeterfive.com/theological-censures-amoris-laetitia-revealed/
I will be continuing to act as spokesman for the group, and will be happy to answer questions.
Dr Joseph Shaw
appealtothecardinals@gmail.com
The
‘National Catholic Reporter’ of Kansas City, Missouri, recently published,
without authorisation, the names of the signatories of a letter to the College
of Cardinals and Eastern Patriarchs; equally without authorisation, The
Australian, an Australia-based newspaper, has recently published the full text
of the letter and the accompanying document. The latter is a theological
critique of the apostolic exhortation Amoris laetitia, and requested that the
cardinals and patriarchs petition Pope Francis to definitively and finally
condemn certain propositions. In order to protect the signatories and the
critique from misrepresentation, the organisers of these documents wish to
offer some further comment and explanation of them.
As explained in previous statements, the organisers did not make these documents public, since they are addressed to the Cardinals and Patriarchs, who would ideally have been allowed to consider them without the distraction of public controversy over the documents.
As explained in previous statements, the organisers did not make these documents public, since they are addressed to the Cardinals and Patriarchs, who would ideally have been allowed to consider them without the distraction of public controversy over the documents.
The
critique is the work of a number of Catholic scholars who were concerned that
Catholics might understand some passages of Amoris laetitia as contradicting
the doctrine of the Catholic faith.
The remedy for this danger is an authoritative and final statement by the Supreme Pontiff stating that these understandings cannot be held by Catholics, and that Amoris laetitia does not present them as magisterial teachings or require that they be believed. The college of cardinals has the function of advising the Pope. The patriarchs of the Eastern Catholic churches also have the right and responsibility to advise the Supreme Pontiff on this matter in virtue of the importance of their office. Accordingly a document was drafted setting forth the gravest dangers of the text of Amoris laetitia and sent to the cardinals and patriarchs, along with a letter requesting them to petition the Pope to condemn the errors at issue.
The dangers to the faith found in passages of Amoris laetitia, in light of the ways they can be understood, are indicated by the application of theological censures. Theological censures are terms that identify the precise character of a threat to faith and morals that is found in an assertion. The various censures used in the document refer either to the gravity of the error found in a statement, or to the harmful effects that are liable to result from it. The censures in the critique are purely doctrinal and not juridical in nature, as the signatories do not claim or possess the authority necessary to impose juridical censures. They do not question the personal faith of Pope Francis or claim that he assents to the propositions censured. This is shown by the purpose of the document, which is to obtain a condemnation of these propositions by the Pope.
The censures are intended to advise the cardinals and patriarchs, and their authority comes from the Scriptural and magisterial texts that are cited to justify them. Censures of this kind may be assigned by any person in the Church who has the knowledge, role, and mission needed to teach concerning questions of faith and morals.
The
censures and the references given to justify them are based on the Catholic
understanding of faith and divine revelation.
According to this understanding, if a statement is proposed by the Church as requiring the assent of faith (the most authoritative level of teaching), that statement is not a human interpretation of a divine act or teaching, but is a statement made by God Himself. Such statements are formulated using languages and concepts belonging to human cultures, and are taught by the Church in particular historical circumstances. But these languages, concepts, and circumstances do not in any way alter or distort the truths that God asserts. They are used by all-powerful divine providence to express precisely the meaning that God intends to communicate. It is the signatories’ earnest hope and prayer that the cardinals and patriarchs will speak out against the errors that their critique addresses, and that the Holy Father will authoritatively condemn these errors.
ENDS
8 comments:
They should be grateful it was made public; that ensures somebody will read it.
Ha! You're probably right! Truly, they would need to be pretty naive to think that it would not be.
Too bad it will be ignored. Catholics - you are on your own now.
Holy Mother the Church does not deceive nor is deceived, Catholics pray. Therefore, who can deny that Francis is head of the false Catholic church slandering dogma?
l. the church rejects capitol punishment. Perhaps the least of the hundreds of false teacdhings of the nous ordo vatican2 religion, which as modernist deceptively claim to be Catholic. It also worships the same god as mohammedism, teaches all men are saved and condemns proselytism and conversion of jews. It about time someone, some people recognized the heresy of the post non catholic relighion. Where have the priests and especially the fake (new sacraments are invalid)bishops been the last 30 , 40,50 years. thank God.Some thinking Catholics have seen the light.
Larry Dessommes.
PS And you are whistling dixie if you think Brogolio is going to response as a true pope which any believing catholic should see and understand he cannot be.
If one loves Christ, His Mother, the Ever Blessed Virgin Mary, and the Church He instituted than sedevacantism is the only loving theologically sound option. Holy Mother the Church is alive and well as promised, However, it is not in the church masses and liturgies of the SSPX (who pray in communion with Francis who is not pope) nor is Christ's church in the novus ordo masses and liturgies.
No JoAn, you are incorrect. I post sedec comments because I understand your suffering but your diagnosis is wrong. Francis is Pope. The deficient Novus Ordo is valid.
I will not debate it.
My dear sir, Holy Mother the Church does not deceive, Catholics pray.
The Pontiffs of the Roman Catholic Church bless their predecessors and do not contradict what has promulgated that binds all Catholics.
Post a Comment