Dubia Submitted to the Holy Father

[Jack4]

18 minutes ago, BarbaraTherese said:

Illnesses and problems, sufferings, have positive meanings in our lives. ...Many of our great saints suffered illness. 

+Sheen would remark while walking past a hospital, "Look at all the wasted suffering!"

[Guest]

"Much suffering in hospitals is wasted." 
Archbishop Fulton Sheen 

We always find that those who walked closest to Christ were those who had to bear the greatest trials.
Saint Teresa of Ávila

Sufferings gladly borne for others convert more people than sermons.
Saint Thérèse of Lisieux

Don’t waste your suffering.
Saint John Paul the Great

You can’t do God’s work without suffering.
Blessed Mother Teresa

 Link to Quotations

You Tube "Bishop Fulton Sheen on Suffering"

[Guest]

1 Corinthians 11:29–30

For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep.

[Jack4]

4 hours ago, BarbaraTherese said:

"Much suffering in hospitals is wasted." 
Archbishop Fulton Sheen 

We always find that those who walked closest to Christ were those who had to bear the greatest trials.
Saint Teresa of Ávila

Sufferings gladly borne for others convert more people than sermons.
Saint Thérèse of Lisieux

Don’t waste your suffering.
Saint John Paul the Great

You can’t do God’s work without suffering.
Blessed Mother Teresa

 Link to Quotations

You Tube "Bishop Fulton Sheen on Suffering"

https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_letters/1984/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_11021984_salvifici-doloris.html 

You might find this an interesting read.

On 11/16/2016 at 11:30 AM, Peace said:

But seriously, who even knew what a dubia was? We are all using the word like we didn't just learn it for the first time two days ago.

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2016/11/24/submitting-dubia-is-a-standard-part-of-church-life-its-not-unreasonable-to-expect-a-clear-answer/

[Guest]

Thank you for the link to Salvifici Doloris, Jack.  I read it when it first came out and retain a copy of it.  Beautiful document.

[Guest]

Catholic World News Headlines http://www.catholicculture.org/news/

17hrs ago: San Diego’s Bishop McElroy strongly encourages Communion for divorced/remarried

Bishop Robert McElroy of San Diego, California, has asked his priests to encourage Catholics who are divorced and remarried to consider whether “God is calling them to return to the Eucharist.”...

 

14hrs ago: Four cardinals could be stripped of status for questioning papal document, says Vatican archbishop

The dean of the Roman Rota has said that Pope Francis, if he wanted, could remove four prelates from the College of Cardinals as punishment for submitting and publicizing their dubia about Amoris Laetitia....

 

14hrs agoCardinal Pell defends four cardinals for asking ‘significant’ questions

Cardinal George Pell has come to the support of the four cardinals who have submitted dubia about the interpretation of Amoris Laetitia....

 

14hrs agoCardinals’ questions about Amoris Laetitia already answered: Father Spadaro

The questions submitted by four cardinals about the interpretation of Amoris Laetitia have already been answered, according to Father Antonio Spadaro....

[PhuturePriest]

Similarly, as explained by this canon lawyer, such claims by the dean of the Roman Rota are absurd and perhaps not only non-canonical, but even anti-canonical: https://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2016/11/29/cardinals-in-the-church-have-rights-too/

[Amppax]

Of interest for this thread: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/scottericalt/ive-changed-my-mind-about-pope-francis/ (Alt, it should be noted, has defended the Pope very vigorously in all this, so his statements are interesting for that fact alone) and http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/26/opinion/sunday/his-holiness-declines-to-answer.html (Douthat is always good, imo). 

[Guest]

Thank you PP and Amppax for the links.

I'm just a gal out in the pews and I have questions, which well might be well below the standard of the (thankfully) educated, but then I am (as are all individuals) representative of a "we" - and we count too (this is not stating that anywhere at all it is felt that we do not count) - I cannot even understand at times commentaries on canon law etc. and the situation re AL.   I'll keep trying to understand but probably will need to wait until the whole issue of the four cardinals and AL is past tense and decided by The Church in a quite formal manner and I am taking it that that will be Pope Francis's decision?

I have read that what Pope Francis wrote in AL was a confirmation of what the bishops decided in the Synod?. 

My other question is: I have read that Canon 915 is a disciplinary law of The Church?  Disciplinary laws and canon law can change if necessary i.e. not beyond Church Law that they can change?  It seems to me to be a question re subject under discussion, in part, of definition what St Paul meant by "unworthy" (reception of The Blessed Eucharist)? The current definition of course is mortal sin and/or living in a manifestly grave situation.

Quote

"But until he [Pope Francis] speaks, the hypothesis is open."  New York Times (article quoted by Amppax)

I think Pope Francis has opened a can of worms...........and then the Pandora's box inside the can of worms.  The current furore and uproar, predictions of doom and gloom, the end is coming etc., very much reminds me of the situation immediately post V2 and still ongoing light spot fires.  I have read too that every Council in The Church has been followed by the same.

The nun who taught me said as long as there was one Catholic on earth, The Church existed on earth.  I don't think we are there - nor that we ever might get there.  But there is something in it nevertheless.

________________

Off topic and smiling :   I wonder if perhaps, just perhaps, media might have learn something from the surprise election of Donald Trump? .........

Quote

 

New York Times article quoted by Amppax: "The logic of “Rome has spoken, the case is closed” is too deeply embedded in the structures of Catholicism to allow for anything but a temporary doctrinal decentralization. So long as the pope remains the pope, any major controversy will inevitably rise back up to the Vatican.

Francis must know this. For now, he seems to be choosing the lesser crisis of feuding bishops and confused teaching over the greater crisis that might come (although who can say for certain?)"

 

 

[Guest]

Sitting outside under the pergola with coffee - can anyone else see some parallel in all this with the arrest and trial of Jesus?

__________

@dUSt I wonder if we might need one of those definition underscores for AL?  I think it just might be a long discussion over an extended period.  Up to you, Oh Fearless Leader

[Nihil Obstat]

Canon law is an interesting mix of purely legal norms and customs, which can be changed according to the dictates of prudence, and the moral law, which is irreformable. I think it is safe to say that canons 915 and 916 are based very strongly in moral law first. It is not a merely legal administrative precept that can be tossed aside.

[Peace]

6 minutes ago, Nihil Obstat said:

Canon law is an interesting mix of purely legal norms and customs, which can be changed according to the dictates of prudence, and the moral law, which is irreformable. I think it is safe to say that canons 915 and 916 are based very strongly in moral law first. It is not a merely legal administrative precept that can be tossed aside.

Well that is the question of the hour isn't it? 

I would think that the moral law would prohibit someone in a state of mortal sin from partaking in communion.

If we can't say certainly that one is in a state of mortal sin, then denial in the case of objective grave sin seems to be more of a prudential measure. In our day and age I wouldn't necessarily think that allowing the divorced and remarried to communion would lead to scandal, or be a hindrance to the couple correcting their actions. Could their participation in the sacraments be used as a means of bringing them back into the life of the church and as an aid to their ultimate correction? I have no idea, but if the powers that be reach that conclusion I am not convinced that it would be wrong. 

I had meant to follow up on your last Q but haven't had a chance to give it the time it would take.

[Nihil Obstat]

To me it is perfectly obvious that living in a state which is objectively contradictory to the moral law means that one is barred under normal circumstances from participating fully in the Church's sacramental life. To be honest, with no condescending whatsoever, I have trouble understanding why this is not obvious to everyone.

[Peace]

3 minutes ago, Nihil Obstat said:

To me it is perfectly obvious that living in a state which is objectively contradictory to the moral law means that one is barred under normal circumstances from participating fully in the Church's sacramental life. To be honest, with no condescending whatsoever, I have trouble understanding why this is not obvious to everyone.

Well most of us live in a state that is objectively contradictory to the moral law. You don't? It seems to me that most people who are allowed to participate in the sacraments are in that state. The difference is the extent (mortal or venial).

We owe God our complete love, devotion and obedience, but very few of us achieve that, or are truly committed to even attempting it when we examine our lives. And that is a violation of the greatest commandment, right?

You would seemingly have to exclude everyone except for the St. Theresa types living among us.

What is your rationale for reaching your conclusion, by the way? It seems obvious to me that this is what the Church has done, but I am not sure why it must always be so.

I know little of formal sacramental theology so perhaps that is the reason for the difference.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Nihil Obstat said:

Canon law is an interesting mix of purely legal norms and customs, which can be changed according to the dictates of prudence, and the moral law, which is irreformable. I think it is safe to say that canons 915 and 916 are based very strongly in moral law first. It is not a merely legal administrative precept that can be tossed aside.

Thanks Nihil -

Nihil, is Pope Francis in AL confirming the majority conclusions of the Synod?  Or is his [Pope Francis] challenge to 915 coming right out the blue and not connected to formal discussions and conclusions in the Synod?

I didn't mean to cast aside the spirit of what they are stating - rather to redefine what constitutes forbidden to attend Holy Communion as in Canon 915.

Canon 916 - Does it mean and still apply that a person in mortal sin cannot even attend Mass?  Have I read rightly?

It seems to me that The Church (Jesus) is totally pushing away grave sinners, rather than fully embracing them:  "I have come for sinners, the righteous have no need of Me".  

It seems to me in practise as if Jesus (The Church) has come only for the righteous or moderately sinful (whatever that is) - unless the seriously sinful convert to the moderately sinful. It seems to me too that this attitude is what Pope Francis is challenging.

I rejoice truly that this debate is at last right out into the open and most everywhere not only on pham - also in the Universal Church and hierarchy.   It is now a public and serious issue in The Church and in secular media and current affairs.  The Church is again under scrutiny.

Faith seeking understanding.

What Peace has to state makes sense to me.

 

Edited December 1, 2016 by BarbaraTherese