Monday, September 19, 2016

Two demurrals from Mirus

Edward Peters, "My I demur re Mirus this once?" (In the Light of the Law, September 13, 2016):
Pretty much everything Dr. Jeff Mirus writes is worth reading, but his latest column, correctly defending Pope Francis against charges of heresy based on his endorsement of the Buenos Aires Directive, overstates the argument in one small, technical regard and, I think, misses a larger, more important point in another. I basically agree with everything Mirus wrote, except as follows. Read more >>
Dr. John Lamont, "Dr. Jeffrey Mirus on marriage and the Eucharist" - via "Op-Ed: 'Adultery as a venial sin' -- and other absurdities of trying to defend the indefensible Francis Doctrine" (Rorate Caeli, September 15, 2016):
Dr. Jeffrey Mirus has recently published an article entitled ‘Not heretical: Pope Francis’ approval of the Argentine bishops’ policy on invalid marriages’ [available here]. The object of this article is to argue that Pope Francis has not asserted or endorsed heresy in approving of a recent document issued by some Argentinian bishops concerning the apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia. To justify this conclusion, Dr. Mirus makes a number of claims about moral behaviour and the discipline of the sacraments.

These claims urgently need to be addressed.
Related: And now a response from Dr. Jeff Mirus, "Papal governance by sleight-of-hand strains my grasp of culpability and Canon Law" (, September 16, 2016).


bill bannon said...

Pressure makes mortal sin venial...unbelievable. The obedience of Nazi furnace attendants was ergo...venial sin....they had families to support.
"Dear", the young husband says, " the pressures you've been putting on me made me date a pole dancer last week from the "Golden Cicada" forced me into venial sin."

Anonymous said...