Tuesday, June 06, 2017

We are watching “development of doctrine” in the making

Amoris Laetitia Development of Doctrine
"Binding and Loosing" right before our eyes!
Pope Bergoglio the Jesuit knows just enough about how to manipulate the Roman Catholic system (theology --> Magisterium) and to create enough of a public upswell (just as with the Marian devotions and doctrines) to see a new doctrine on marriage in the making. Yes, folks, we are witnessing a development of doctrine right before our eyes:
Cardinal Cupich has written the forward to a new English translation of Cardinal Coccopalmerio's booklet "A Commentary on Chapter Eight of Amoris Laetitia",...

In his endorsement of Coccopalmerio's book-long defense of adultery for the divorced and civilly remarried, Cupich cites an article by Rocco Buttiglione calling Amoris Laetitia a "development of doctrine and what it means for Popes to exercise their divinely granted Petrine power of loosening and binding in different ways and in different historical circumstances." (Emphasis added).

Cupich suggests Francis' new teaching on sex and the sacraments marks "new opportunities to retrieve certain truths that have become dormant," namely about the Church's teaching on conscience and mitigating circumstances, such that "when it comes to dealing with certain so-called irregular situations, what is required is a pastoral approach that takes into consideration both the general and the individual aspects of a person's life."

To understand Amoris Laetitia's treatment of conscience, Cardinal Cupich also recommends an article on the subject by Fr. James Keenan, an LGBT activist and supporter of condoms, who even testified publicly against a Massachusetts bill defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman as "contrary to the Catholic Church's teaching on social justice." Given that Cupich is on the record also supporting Holy Communion for some living active homosexual lifestyles, this all should come as no surprise.

Cupich's comments about "binding and loosing" regarding marriage and adultery also smack of two disturbing quotes from the 2015 synod on the family:

"Others, for the penitential way, intend a process of clarification and of a new direction, after the failure experienced, accompanied by a delegated presbyter.. [who] may reach an evaluation so as to make use of the power to bind and loose in a way adequate to the situation." - 2015 Instrumentum Laboris, 123

We are honored to be watching the sensus fidelium lead the way into a development of this new Roman Catholic doctrine!

Edit 6/7/2017, 9:30 am: It seems as if Peter Williams (@PeterDCXW) did not catch my allusion here to the sensus fidelium. Of course it was a reference to Pope Bergoglio knowing how to manipulate the popular opinion – in this case, “divorced and remarried ought to be able to receive communion” – in order to create a groundswell that can then be attributed to the sensus fidelium (“the sense of the whole faithful”) in order to make the claim that the doctrine should be changed.


  1. What exactly is the biblical concept(s) of "Social Justice"? The Left has an idea; Dennis Prager has another idea; how are we to think about a notion that likely will not go away?

    1. Chet -- I'm not sure what your question here has to do with the topic of the post. Of course, there is that small matter of "feed the hungry, clothe the naked", etc. Prior to that, the Old Testament laws were full of compassion for strangers and aliens, made allowances for jubilees, etc.

    2. chet

      "What exactly is the biblical concept(s) of "Social Justice"? The Left has an idea; Dennis Prager has another idea; how are we to think about a notion that likely will not go away?"

      Which of the following views best align with the biblical worldview?

      For starters, there's a difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome.

      For another, "social justice" could be discussed in political, economic, socio-cultural, and other terms. For example, should equality of economic outcome be the main goal? Is it just to have every worker make the same amount of money no matter what they do, don't do, etc.?

      For still another, who fundamentally guarantees social justice (e.g. individual rights) for society? Is it the gov't? Do humans have innate rights?

      And so on.

    3. I apologize for the distracting cmt; the notion (SJ) does arise frequently, however, and w\i your post - "the Catholic church's teaching on social justice."

      I do appreciate both replies which are helpful to me. "Should equality of economic outcome be the main goal?" At a minimum, that is the tacit expectation from a large contingent of our citizenry. And furthermore, aren't we now engaged in the matter of semantics with respect to "justice"? In our time there is a wide departure from scriptural usage for that term, IMO.

    4. Semantics doesn't equate with trivial or jesuitical, for he who controls definitions controls the debate

  2. John, sexual mores and attitudes on divorce were rather liberal during the first centuries of Christendom, & istm Rome is jettisoning its high views of marriage & family in AL's tacit assent to the post-Christian societal status quo. Scriptural norms provided a strong witness to pagans, and so-called liberal Protestants' abandoning such have lost both their witness and their numbers. Rome's liberalization has done the same to it. Is there any evidence that liberlaization will result in stanching the hemorrhaging of members? Rome has always been rational albeit wrong; Jorge seems an hamburger shy of an Happy Meal. Your take?

    1. Hi Kirk -- I put up a blog post early on: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2013/10/pope-francis-is-cleaning-house.html. It is impossible to know what Bergoglio's motivation is, but some of the largest numbers of Roman Catholics leave because they get divorced. I suspect he thinks he is going to slow down that number. But as you say that the liberal protestants are losing both their witness and their numbers, I think this will have the same effect: people will see through this -- they'll see it for what it really is -- and the RCC will continue to lose numbers.