Feser quotes Ratzinger (when he was JP2's head of doctrine) as follows:
_____________
If a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment … he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities … to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible … to have recourse to capital punishment. _____________
Seems to me that Ratzinger was wrong - and potentially JP2 for allowing such a teaching. As Richard Nixon's press secretary supposedly once said, such statements are "inoperative."
As you know, changes in Catholic policy tend to be incremental. There's a softening up process. What Francis has done represents the culmination of a trajectory set in motion by JP2.
If anyone deserves blame for this debacle it's JP2. Other than the Assisi events, I guess he did no wrong. Needless to say I'll never understand the cult of personality that grew up around the man.
BTW, I like Feser (never met or corresponded with him though) and he seems sincere enough. For someone with six children and a full time job (if college professors have full time jobs) he puts out a lot of interesting, worthwhile stuff. I'm not sure why he doesn't write a book on the church's change on religious liberty, which doesn't seem less significant from the DP issue. I guess that issue is passe' with the exception of certain traditionalists.
The Pope's defenders are saying that it isn't a complete change from church teaching because Francis doesn't describe the DP as "intrinisically immoral" or sinful. But that doesn't seem to be a big deal. According to the pope there were conditions in the past that justified the DP, but if those situations exist today you can't have the DP because it "violates the dignity of the human person." So that makes it sinful today (and by implication in the past).
The most incredible thing is that this is justified (in part) on changes in the prison system in "the modern world." There are almost 200 countries in the world and apparently all of them have (or are capable of having) a modern prison system (eg equal to Italy's I guess). This argument is so silly that I can't believe it being put forward in good faith. Last I read Zimbabwe had 5 bucks in their treasury.
Leftism if far entrenched in the church - Francis' successor is likely move in the same direction he is moving it. In other words, the gates of hell will continue to close in on the Roman Catholic Church in the foreseeable future.
The only conservative Catholics who continue to defend the current pope's outrageous pronouncements are papists (and not merely staunch Catholics). And from what I have seen, there seem to be quite a few of them.
Feser quotes Ratzinger (when he was JP2's head of doctrine) as follows:
ReplyDelete_____________
If a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment … he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities … to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible … to have recourse to capital punishment.
_____________
Seems to me that Ratzinger was wrong - and potentially JP2 for allowing such a teaching. As Richard Nixon's press secretary supposedly once said, such statements are "inoperative."
As you know, changes in Catholic policy tend to be incremental. There's a softening up process. What Francis has done represents the culmination of a trajectory set in motion by JP2.
DeleteIf anyone deserves blame for this debacle it's JP2. Other than the Assisi events, I guess he did no wrong. Needless to say I'll never understand the cult of personality that grew up around the man.
ReplyDeleteBTW, I like Feser (never met or corresponded with him though) and he seems sincere enough. For someone with six children and a full time job (if college professors have full time jobs) he puts out a lot of interesting, worthwhile stuff. I'm not sure why he doesn't write a book on the church's change on religious liberty, which doesn't seem less significant from the DP issue. I guess that issue is passe' with the exception of certain traditionalists.
The Pope's defenders are saying that it isn't a complete change from church teaching because Francis doesn't describe the DP as "intrinisically immoral" or sinful. But that doesn't seem to be a big deal. According to the pope there were conditions in the past that justified the DP, but if those situations exist today you can't have the DP because it "violates the dignity of the human person." So that makes it sinful today (and by implication in the past).
ReplyDeleteThe most incredible thing is that this is justified (in part) on changes in the prison system in "the modern world." There are almost 200 countries in the world and apparently all of them have (or are capable of having) a modern prison system (eg equal to Italy's I guess). This argument is so silly that I can't believe it being put forward in good faith. Last I read Zimbabwe had 5 bucks in their treasury.
And what competence does the church have on prisons, crime, etc.? Covering up crime seems to be their only area of expertise in this matter.
ReplyDeleteLeftism if far entrenched in the church - Francis' successor is likely move in the same direction he is moving it. In other words, the gates of hell will continue to close in on the Roman Catholic Church in the foreseeable future.
ReplyDeleteThe only conservative Catholics who continue to defend the current pope's outrageous pronouncements are papists (and not merely staunch Catholics). And from what I have seen, there seem to be quite a few of them.
This is in fact the second change in the Catechism. John Paul 2 changed the wording in 1997 to reflect Evangelium Vitae.
ReplyDelete