FILIAL CORRECTION of Pope Francis

[KnightofChrist]

SUMMARY OF THE “FILIAL CORRECTION”

A 25-page letter signed by 40 Catholic clergy and lay scholars was delivered to Pope Francis on August 11th. Since no answer was received from the Holy Father, it is being made public today, 24th September, Feast of Our Lady of Ransom and of Our Lady of Walsingham. The letter, which is open to new signatories, now has the names of 62 clergy and lay scholars from 20 countries, who also represent others lacking the necessary freedom of speech. It has a Latin title: ‘Correctio filialis de haeresibus propagatis’ (literally, ‘A filial correction concerning the propagation of heresies’). It states that the pope has, by his Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia, and by other, related, words, deeds and omissions, effectively upheld 7 heretical positions about marriage, the moral life, and the reception of the sacraments, and has caused these heretical opinions to spread in the Catholic Church. These 7 heresies are expressed by the signatories in Latin, the official language of the Church.

This letter of correction has 3 main parts. In the first part, the signatories explain why, as believing and practising Catholics, they have the right and duty to issue such a correction to the supreme pontiff. Church law itself requires that competent persons not remain silent when the pastors of the Church are misleading the flock. This involves no conflict with the Catholic dogma of papal infallibility, since the Church teaches that a pope must meet strict criteria before his utterances can be considered infallible. Pope Francis has not met these criteria. He has not declared these heretical positions to be definitive teachings of the Church, or stated that Catholics must believe them with the assent of faith. The Church teaches no pope can claim that God has revealed some new truth to him, which it would be obligatory for Catholics to believe.

The second part of the letter is the essential one, since it contains the ‘Correction’ properly speaking. It lists the passages of Amoris laetitia in which heretical positions are insinuated or encouraged, and then it lists words, deeds, and omissions of Pope Francis which make it clear beyond reasonable doubt that he wishes Catholics to interpret these passages in a way that is, in fact, heretical. In particular, the pope has directly or indirectly countenanced the beliefs that obedience to God’s Law can be impossible or undesirable, and that the Church should sometimes accept adultery as compatible with being a practising Catholic.

The final part, called ‘Elucidation’, discusses two causes of this unique crisis. One cause is ‘Modernism’. Theologically speaking, Modernism is the belief that God has not delivered definite truths to the Church, which she must continue to teach in exactly the same sense until the end of time. Modernists hold that God communicates to mankind only experiences., which human beings can reflect on, so as to make various statements about God, life and religion; but such statements are only provisional, never fixed dogmas. Modernism was condemned by Pope St Pius X at the start of the 20th century, but it revived in the middle of the century. The great and continuing confusion caused in the Catholic Church by Modernism obliges the signatories to describe the true meaning of ‘faith’, ‘heresy’, ‘revelation’, and ‘magisterium’.

A second cause of the crisis is the apparent influence of the ideas of Martin Luther on Pope Francis. The letter shows how Luther, the founder of Protestantism, had ideas on marriage, divorce, forgiveness, and divine law which correspond to those which the pope has promoted by word, deed and omission. It also notes the explicit and unprecedented praise given by Pope Francis to the German heresiarch.

The signatories do not venture to judge the degree of awareness with which Pope Francis has propagated the 7 heresies which they list. But they respectfully insist that he condemn these heresies, which he has directly or indirectly upheld.

The signatories profess their loyalty to the holy Roman Church, assure the pope of their prayers, and ask for his apostolic blessing.

VIEW HERE THE DOCUMENT

http://www.correctiofilialis.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Correctio-filialis_English.pdf

Source: http://www.correctiofilialis.org

[Anastasia13]

I was about to post this aticle on it that has a summary of the issues. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/news/breaking-62-scholars-correct-pope-francis-for-propagating-heresies

Does this matter to the average lay people?

Do you think anything will happen (other than a few media presuming the Church gives the OK for very liberal actions)?

[Era Might]

The Inquisition is back.

[McM RSCJ]

I think it unfortunate, at best, the authors, whoever they are, do not publicize their names--and do not even offer text that explains why.   Other adjectives that come to my mind are "cowardly" and "deceptive."

One press contact is given, the email for a Dr. Joseph Shaw who serves as a tutor in Moral Philosophy in St. Benet's Hall where their website claims fifty students.  Are the authors hoping that hundreds now are going to find their words and sign on? 

So I find myself concluding (unless I learn otherwise from a more forthcoming publication) that some small group somewhere decided it is up to them to "set straight" Pope Francis and the overwhelming majority of the Bishops in Synod.  

(Perhaps, Knight of Christ, you know whose these folks are?  Perhaps you are an author or a signatory?) 

I read the document to become informed.  To be surprise, I found ample citation from Amoris Laetitia --so I was able to reread passages that continue to lift my spirit and enlarge my heart by offering a vision of the Gospel and a Christ of Mercy and forgiveness.  

(I guess the authors believe I should find those passages disturbing and heretical?  I don't.)

But the rest of the text (presumably their own words) I find odd, dictatorial, unconvincing, and mean-spirited.  I am sorry the authors find themselves (their lives?  their energies?) trapped in past theoretical battles over "Modernism" and Counter-Reformation vestiges concerning Martin Luther.  For the harvest is plentiful and laborers are few, so the Gospel imperatives, to look to the horizons, roll up sleeves, be sent into today's fields and plunge right in is stronger than ever.

I also do not know any Catholics caught up in the "confusion" these anonymous authors insist is the result Amoris Laetitia.  On the contrary, I have heard of priests who find it a tremendous gift and pastoral resource in working with young persons considering marriage.  The whole enterprise (including the Dubia) strikes me as a small tempest in a very small theological teapot. 

Edited September 24, 2017 by McM RSCJ

[truthfinder]

Their names are publicized. It's on the website as well as elsewhere. 

[KnightofChrist]

I'm just going to ignore the personal attacks on the signers and hope for constructive discussion on the context of the document. It may be that I die waiting for that. 

 

[McM RSCJ]

The names of the signers are published.

But I cannot find the names of the authors.  Truthfinder, if you have seen the names of the authors, may I ask if you could post the link?

 

[KnightofChrist]

http://www.correctiofilialis.org/signatories/

 

[truthfinder]

8 minutes ago, McM RSCJ said:

The names of the signers are published.

But I cannot find the names of the authors.  Truthfinder, if you have seen the names of the authors, may I ask if you could post the link?

 

My apologies, sister. I misread what you wrote. Indeed I don't know who the authors are. However, what I do know, is that with the exception of Bp. Fellay, all the signers were on the document when it when to Rome in July. As with other open letters, they may all feel to be equally authors (I mean do we really know the Pope's ghostwriters for some of his documents?)

[havok579257]

am i correct in understanding one of the main or the main person leading this writing is an SSPX priest?

Edited September 24, 2017 by havok579257

[KnightofChrist]

An SSPX bishop and a priest, yes.

[havok579257]

1 minute ago, KnightofChrist said:

An SSPX bishop and a priest, yes.

so how much stock should we put into what this bishop and priest says since they themselves are not in line with the one holy and true catholic church?

[KnightofChrist]

Just now, havok579257 said:

so how much stock should we put into what this bishop and priest says since they themselves are not in line with the one holy and true catholic church?

As much shock that I have seeing that people here and elsewhere on the internet can only attack the persons of those that signed the document. SSPX is not is schism, are Catholics within the Catholic Church. 

Anyone want to actually discuss the context of the document or nah?

[havok579257]

Just now, KnightofChrist said:

As much shock that I have seeing that people here and elsewhere on the internet can only attack the persons of those that signed the document. SSPX is not is schism, are Catholics within the Catholic Church. 

Anyone want to actually discuss the context of the document or nah?

i am not attacking anyone else who signed on the the letter.  i am just talking about those who belong to the SSPX.  Those priests and bishops are not in full communion with rome and are leading people astray.  So I take anything they say with a grain of salt.  

[truthfinder]

14 minutes ago, KnightofChrist said:

An SSPX bishop and a priest, yes.

Now I'm the one asking for documentation. The understanding I've seen from Rorate is that Bp Fellay only signed this document after it was initially submitted to Rome, and therefor is one of the last signers and it would be difficult to construe as one of the main 'pushers' of the document. Although, I don't think the SSPX have been shy in their criticism of AL or recent other happenings.