Dubia Submitted to the Holy Father

[Nihil Obstat]

7 minutes ago, BarbaraTherese said:

An honest question to which I genuinely do not know the answer.

Doesn't someone(s) of a particular expertise (whatever area might be required)check out these Papal Documents before they are published, or does the Holy Father simply write them and send them to the publisher?  I would have thought they would be checked out by whomsoever(s) and any problems discussed with The Holy Father before publication?  Of course, The Holy Father, would make the final decision.

 

Well couple points. Yes, documents are typically reviewed by experts in some capacity. That was done in this case, a great many concerns were offered and corrections proposed, and they were all ignored. So goes the somewhat-more-than-a-rumour at the moment. Second, it is not uncommon for papal documents to be partially or completely ghostwritten. For example, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was the primary consultant and wrote sections of the encyclical Fidei Donum. In the case of Amoris Laetitia it is widely suspected that Archbishop Victor Fernandez was a major ghostwriter. It would not surprise me if Cardinals Kasper and Schoenborn were also at least consulted at times. But regardless of its material authorship, in promulgating the document of course the Holy Father makes it his own in a formal manner. 

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Nihil Obstat said:

Well couple points. Yes, documents are typically reviewed by experts in some capacity. That was done in this case, a great many concerns were offered and corrections proposed, and they were all ignored. So goes the somewhat-more-than-a-rumour at the moment. Second, it is not uncommon for papal documents to be partially or completely ghostwritten. For example, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was the primary consultant and wrote sections of the encyclical Fidei Donum. In the case of Amoris Laetitia it is widely suspected that Archbishop Victor Fernandez was a major ghostwriter. It would not surprise me if Cardinals Kasper and Schoenborn were also at least consulted at times. But regardless of its material authorship, in promulgating the document of course the Holy Father makes it his own in a formal manner. 

Thank you

[Jack4]

7 hours ago, Nihil Obstat said:

In the case of Amoris Laetitia it is widely suspected that Archbishop Victor Fernandez was a major ghostwriter. It would not surprise me if Cardinals Kasper and Schoenborn were also at least consulted at times.

What would surprise me the most (and I mean a mega-hyper-uber surprise), is if +Schneider and +Meisner were ghostwriters.

[Jack4]

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2017/01/important-interview-with-card-caffarra-about-the-dubia-and-amoris-laetitia-confusion/ 

Interview with Cardinal Caffarra

[Jack4]

[Amppax]

On 1/14/2017 at 7:02 PM, Nihil Obstat said:

Well couple points. Yes, documents are typically reviewed by experts in some capacity. That was done in this case, a great many concerns were offered and corrections proposed, and they were all ignored. So goes the somewhat-more-than-a-rumour at the moment. Second, it is not uncommon for papal documents to be partially or completely ghostwritten. For example, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was the primary consultant and wrote sections of the encyclical Fidei Donum. In the case of Amoris Laetitia it is widely suspected that Archbishop Victor Fernandez was a major ghostwriter. It would not surprise me if Cardinals Kasper and Schoenborn were also at least consulted at times. But regardless of its material authorship, in promulgating the document of course the Holy Father makes it his own in a formal manner. 

 

Even Crux, of all places, has published criticism of the Fernandez connection: https://cruxnow.com/commentary/2017/01/15/ethicist-says-ghostwriters-role-amoris-troubling/.

[Guest]

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2017/02/01/clarification-is-gravely-needed-international-priests-association-gives-support-to-dubia/

The Confraternities of Catholic Clergy, who represent around 1,000 priests in Britain, Ireland, Australia and the United States, said a clarification is “gravely needed to correct the misuse of the Apostolic Exhortation to undermine sacred Tradition”.

The statement, reproduced in full below, says that “the unity of the Church” and the “salvation of souls” are threatened by the widely divergent interpretations of the Pope’s apostolic exhortation, released last April. “We therefore thank the four eminent Cardinals who have recently submitted their dubia to the Holy See.”

 

[Nihil Obstat]

I did not want to make a separate thread for it, but I am very excited at the moment because there are renewed rumours that a canonical structure for the SSPX is imminent. (Again.) But this time we have his excellency Bishop Fellay saying the same, so I am - once again - allowing myself to be very hopeful. I will smoke a celebratory pipe when the structure is announced.

[Amppax]

45 minutes ago, Nihil Obstat said:

I did not want to make a separate thread for it, but I am very excited at the moment because there are renewed rumours that a canonical structure for the SSPX is imminent. (Again.) But this time we have his excellency Bishop Fellay saying the same, so I am - once again - allowing myself to be very hopeful. I will smoke a celebratory pipe when the structure is announced.

 

Can you pm me about the details? I'd be interested to read more, but I'm guessing some of the sources aren't exactly kosher around these parts. 

[Nihil Obstat]

1 hour ago, Amppax said:

Can you pm me about the details? I'd be interested to read more, but I'm guessing some of the sources aren't exactly kosher around these parts. 

Actually you can see the important stuff just via Rorate. Maybe not considered 'credible' around here, but at least links to it are allowed.  

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2017/01/ecclesia-dei-confirms-fellay-full.html

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2017/01/sspx-superior-general-fellay-agreement.html

[Nihil Obstat]

Reading deeper into the hearsay, the rumour is that the Society is already being treated as de facto regularized, and it was even communicated to them at the time of their last ordinations that the ordinations could proceed licitly without the local ordinary's permission. If this is the case, it is basically an amplification of the status quo over the last decade or so.

[Jack4]

 

Quote

Is a signing [of an agreement] close? "It is not a question of calendar," but of "full development of the dossier," the main players insist. Nevertheless, two symbolic dates are mentioned in Rome: July 7, 2017, tenth anniversary of Benedict XVI's motu proprio that reestablished the Mass according to the 1962 Missal, called the Latin Mass, as well as Extraordinary rite [sic] in the Catholic Church. Or May 13, 2017, centenary of the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima in Portugal. Pope Francis will be, on the latter day, on a pilgrimage [to Fatima].

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2017/02/sspx-vatican-two-dates-are-mentioned-in.html

 

[Nihil Obstat]

This would also be, to my knowledge, the first time since the late 80s that specific dates have been mentioned, even if only in rumours.

[Amppax]

"that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me." (John 17:21). 

 

[Nihil Obstat]

Admittedly, I would prefer that it happen sooner. We have waited long enough. Melt the wax already and just seal the deal.