Echeverria: Three significant problems in Amoris Laetitia
Eduardo Echeverria, "
Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia and St. John Paul II" (CWR, April 9, 2016):
I think that Chapter 8, "Accompanying, Discerning and Integrating Weakness", is the most problematic section of Amoris Laetitia (AL) for three reasons:
1) Pope Francis seems almost (not quite, but almost) incapable of
acknowledging that an individual is sinfully responsible for rejecting
the truth of marriage and family. Yes, he upholds the objectivity of
God’s “primordial loving plan” (9), of the deepest reality of marriage (AL 10), grounded in the order of creation. Indeed, Pope Francis’s reflections on marriage and family life in AL 8-30
are beautiful, insightful, and, yes, deeply biblical. Furthermore, his
reflections on the tradition of magisterial teaching regarding marriage
and family life in light of creation, fall into sin, and redemption in AL 61-88,
provide a catechesis that is foundational to our thinking as
Christians. Yet he almost never holds a person totally accountable for
resisting the evidence of creation about marriage (see Rom 1:18ff.).
It’s almost as if everyone is invincibly ignorant.
2) In light of 1), furthermore, he puts a heavy emphasis on the
distinction between subjective and objective morality, that is,
questions regarding moral culpability, on the one hand, and the
objective standards of right and wrong on the other, and hence he seeks
to find mitigating circumstances that absolve a person of full
responsibility for his actions (AL 302).
3) He distinguishes (following John Paul II's Familiaris Consortio) between the different concepts of the “law of gradualness” (which he affirms, AL 295),
which is a step-by-step moral advance, and the “gradualness of the
law,” meaning thereby that there are “different degrees or forms of
precept in God's law for different individuals and situations” (FC 34), which
he says that he rejects. With respect to the law of gradualness,
Francis urges us, in view of the undeniable challenges of our time, “to
present marriage more as a dynamic path to personal development and
fulfilment than as a lifelong burden” (AL 37). He adds, “This
is not a ‘gradualness of law’ but rather a gradualness in the prudential
exercise of free acts on the part of subjects who are not in a position
to understand, appreciate, or fully carry out the objective demands of
the law” (AL 295).
And yet in AL 303 and 305, he suggests that a person not only
may be doing the best that he can, but also that such acts therefore are
not sinful and hence are right for that person, because the person, in
his mitigating circumstances, fulfills the ideal as applied by that
individual in those limiting circumstances. This way of thinking was
unavoidable because throughout AL Francis apparently emphasizes the “ideal” nature of the normative order of marriage and family life.
But how can God be asking one to do X when X is contrary to his will?
The pope must think that X is not contrary to the will of God in that
specific circumstance, but only contrary to God's ideal will which the
person is inculpable for not attaining.
So, with all due respect to Francis, I think that he does imply support
for the “gradualness of the law” and hence by implication opens the door
to a “situation ethics.” He says, “Yet conscience can do more than
recognize that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the
overall demands of the Gospel. It can also recognize with sincerity and
honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given
to God, and come to see with a certain moral security that it is what
God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits,
while yet not fully the objective ideal” (AL 303). It is hard
to see why a person needs the grace of the sacrament of confession, and
hence the Lord’s mercy, if, as Francis suggests here, that person is
doing the will of God.
Read more >>
Your right.AL contradicts Pope John Paul's Veritatis Splendor.
ReplyDeleteLiberal catechesis on mortal sin by Jimmy Akins
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/06/liberal-catechesis-on-mortal-sin-by.html
Whether they know it or not non Catholics with the stain of Original Sin on their soul and mortal sins committed in that state and without the Sacraments outside of which there is no salvation, are all oriented to Hell
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/02/whether-they-know-it-or-not-non.html
SOHO MASS - CONTRADICTS CATECHISM AND VERITATIS SPLENDOR
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2009/10/soho-mass-two-different-moral-and.html
Archbishop Emeritus Kevin McDonald of Southwark implies the 'seeds of the Word' in other religions is the ordinary means of salvation and these exceptions are explicitly known
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2011/11/archbishop-emeritus-kevin-mcdonald-of.html
ITS OFFICIAL. SHE WILL BE GIVEN THE EUCHARIST IN WASHINGTON, USA
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/03/its-official-she-will-be-given.html
One major casue of liberalism in faith and morals is the Richard Cushing Error
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/07/one-major-casue-of-liberalism-in-faith.html
Archbishop Muller contradicts Pope Francis' alleged statement to La Reppublica on conscience
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/10/archbishop-muller-contradicts-pope.html