I have been curious about a trend where a lot of misinformation has been circulating about the latest papal exhortation, Amoris Laetitia. So, how much have you read.
All of it.
Loved the stream of consciousness parts on marriage prep. Several good ideas and approaches to ponder.
Also appreciated the discourse on 1 Corinthians. One of my favorite parts of Scripture anyway, so I might be biased.
A little of it, I get lost in the language, I’m just plain dumb in reality. I was hoping that eventually someone would explain what all the fuss was about, break it down Barney style ya know…
Re-reading it for the third time.
Read it and loved it. Can anyone tell me if lifesitenews.com is a legit catholic website with particular reference to their comments on this exhortation. Thank you.
I’ve read it three or four times now, with plans on reading it again next month. Have also read the Relatio from the Extraordinary Synod on the Family of 2014 and the Relatio Finalis of the Synod on the Family of 2015. Am currently finishing up the Wednesday audiences on the family that Pope Francis gave in the intervening time period between the two Synods, and have a whole stack of books related to Amoris and the Synods that I will be tackling in the coming months.
So, have I read it? A resounding “yes,” and then some. I’ve found it to be a marvelous document that, in many areas, has forced me to examine my conscience in regards to my relationship with my spouse, my children, and our extended family. I’m heartbroken over the fact that so many people have cast aside the main thrust of the document to focus on a footnote that they presume somehow changes Church teaching and practice.
:rotfl: Spoken like a true Marine!
I have not read it, but that certainly does not mean I have not heard of it. I have followed the controversy about it , but still am confused.
I have read “The Popes’ commentary
on Marriage: 12 things you should know”
By Jimmy Aitken,
Explaining that it is MORE than just about
accepting homosexuals and divorced persons
into the fellowship of the Church, it is a treatise
on the FAMILY, the basic building-block of
the society and the Church as well. And may
I add, it doesn’t change the Church’s teaching
on Marriage and Divorce.
Read the whole thing which is why I am struggling with Chapter 8. There is so much that is positive (mostly the Scriptural references). I find that the few times outside Chapter 8 where the tone becomes somewhat ‘off’ to my ear have to do with the references to psychology. Now I have some background, certainly not expert, but much more than casual, with regard to psychology and psychologists, who can do wonders in their fields (psychology being a terrific example that there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ when it comes to psychological issues, but of course psychology is not the be-all and end-all of the human ‘psyche’), but over the last couple of decades I’ve also seen how often ‘things fall apart’ (and I’m not simply talking about how, for example, many gifted psychologists once thought they could ‘cure’ such things as pedophilia and alcoholism). So when I see the same kinds of terminology and examples and, to put it frankly, ‘jargon’ applied to theology and religion, I’m not just disconcerted, I’m worried. We do not need the latest pop psychology (or even some of the very helpful psychology) because, in the long run, it is going to run counter to theology and religion, and you are going to wind up with a generation or more who manage to convince themselves that anything they desire to do can be explained and excused on a ‘psychological’ basis, and the Church, from its desire to dissociate itself from its ‘anti-science label’ (which it has never deserved) will be attempting to show how enlightened it is by meekly murmuring, “oh yes, we’re smarter, we know better now, we simply can’t presume to have ‘black and white’ areas, who are we to judge’”
No, I’m not ‘judging’ any person. I’m not ‘indifferent’ to people’s pain. But I am sick and tired of being jerked around like a puppet on a string, whether it is from ‘one side’ or the other, and told that I’m either complicit in damning myself and all humanity if I am ‘perceived’ as not paying enough attention to Church liturgy and law, or that I’m complicit in damning myself and all humanity if I am 'perceived as not paying enough attention to ‘the poor’.
For God’s sake, what has happened to far too many Catholics these days? Why must we incessantly try to yank the barque of Peter into one direction at the expense of another? We are ‘both-and’, not ‘either-or’, and if we are (as we should be) paying attention to the ‘practical’ side of Christianity by making sure we do the corporal works of mercy (I’m sure you can Google them lest this post pass the 6000 character limit ), then we had damn (and I mean it) well better be sure we are paying just as much attention to doing the spiritual works of mercy.
I am sick and tired of hearing how in order to best ‘minister to the poor’ we have to jettison contemplation, liturgical reform, ‘tradition’, etc. as if those are ‘taking away time’; just as I am sick and tired of hearing how in order to best ‘bring Catholicism to the world’ we need to focus more on our prayers and devotions, and going out and doing work for ‘people who already have plenty of programs in place’ is taking valuable time away THERE.
We should be doing both, and with equal intensity.
And again, that is where I have the problem with AL, again ‘as I see it’. The focus on ‘meeting people where they are’ is all well and good, but there is never a real and concerted ‘end point’. If we’re just going to go out and 'make ourselves dirty on the battlefield, stand around sticking band-aids on gaping wounds, and patting ourselves on the back because we’re not just sitting on our keisters praying ‘Latin mumbo jumbo’ and holding our lily-white selves away from our disgusting fellow man, but we aren’t HELPING said fellow man to come off the battlefield, have his wounds cleaned and dressed (which may hurt like blazes, and which indeed may never even completely heal), so that he can then stop the fighting and move on with all of us to our final destination, which I hope will be heaven, then we really aren’t doing our fellow man or ourselves any favors at all.
If only (my opinion) Chapter 8 had said after its exhortation to go out and meet people who were suffering, and to help them realize that suffering can have a higher purpose, that carrying a cross was hard and while we couldn’t take it away we could try to lighten it by sympathy instead of trying to claim that cross shouldn’t be there at all, that maybe one of the long, slow cures for the decline of marriage in the West would be people living their own lives united to Christ in the cross and getting practical and spiritual help from the Church, who could develop communities for abandoned spouses and children to live and to obtain work and above all spiritual helps, to bring back to the ‘abandoning’ spouses some sense of responsibility for not just their ‘second’ but their ‘first’ families, to realize that 'oh gosh no we can’t make it all better for everybody just by saying, 'everybody decide for yourself if you feel you need something. Maintain Truth, and The Church would be called every name in the book. Plenty of people would drop away. And as the years went by, and it wouldn’t really take too many, those same people who thought how awful we were would start to see the Truth, because we would be out there LIVING IT. I am sorry to say but with the ambiguity of Chapter 8 and the footnote especially, and the decisions lately of the Argentine bishops, the California bishops, and the Atlantic Canadian bishops to name a few, we are NOT going to be seen as living ‘real Catholicism’. We’re going to be seen as 'finally seeing ‘reality’ which in Catholic speak code over the last 2000 years means, “denying the Faith and accepting whatever the world says is true, as true.” And we’re not going to save souls, we’re going to be complicit in the possible damnation of more souls than can be imagined.