I wrote and it is truth, that my God is not yours! Why you compare them? I defend my God, you defend your father.
This is another example of how EWTN is moving away from its previous, long standing, support for the papacy and the Church. Its news section in particular is turning into just another lifesitenews website or similar. For those interested in what the EWTN article is criticizing, I copy a few paragraphs from the Crux article: Astonishingly, some Catholics continue to see the debate over Pope Francis’s document on the family, Amoris Laetita, entirely in abstract terms of whether or not the Church should conform itself to the world in the matter of divorce. In some of the more lurid scenarios, protesters are cast as heroic martyrs to the truth, boldly taking the place of Thomas More or Athanasius, against a pontiff presumably playing Henry VIII or Arius. This view is laughable, given that throughout the synod church doctrine on marriage was never in question, and Amoris Laetitia is a long hymn to the beauty and necessity of a covenant of life-long fidelity. Yet one of the authors of the now-famous dubia letter challenging the pope, American Cardinal Raymond Burke, threatens that if he does not receive a reply from Francis “clarifying” the teaching of Amoris he will declare it to be “a serious error.” The “error,” as he put it in a recent interview, is “to give latitude to a practice which has never been admitted in the Church, namely the practice of permitting people who are living publicly in grave sin to receive the Sacraments.” https://cruxnow.com/analysis/2016/12/30/critics-amoris-need-look-concrete-cases/
To raise questions about ambiguous statements that a pope has made is not, as you say, being unsupportive of the papacy or the church. This is ridiculous even for those who cannot find anything potentially wrong with what Pope Francis has said on a number of issues. Your canonization of Pope Francis is very premature. It seems to me that your labeling of faithful Catholics is potentially more sinful than then any questioning of ambiguous statements made by our pope of faith and morals by faithful Catholics.
My comment was based on the basic content of the EWTN news section which contains all the 'questioning' of sites like lifesitenews and onepeter5. It has now become the standard defence of the Francis critics that they are only 'asking questions'. Yes, and I'm sorry, but that was always the way the Jewish critics of Jesus would try to undermine Him.
I defend God .........,...................................who is the Father!! Jesus the second person of the Blessed Trinity told us to address God the Father as Father! Gospel of Matthew 6: 5-13 5 'And when you pray, do not imitate the hypocrites: they love to say their prayers standing up in the synagogues and at the street corners for people to see them. In truth I tell you, they have had their reward. 6 But when you pray, go to your private room, shut yourself in, and so pray to your Father who is in that secret place, and your Father who sees all that is done in secret will reward you. 7 'In your prayers do not babble as the gentiles do, for they think that by using many words they will make themselves heard. 8 Do not be like them; your Father knows what you need before you ask him. 9 So you should pray like this: Our Father in heaven, may your name be held holy, 10 your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as in heaven. 11 Give us today our daily bread. 12 And forgive us our debts, as we have forgiven those who are in debt to us. 13 And do not put us to the test, but save us from the Evil One. And in the Gospel according to Luke! Luke 11: 1-4 1 Now it happened that he was in a certain place praying, and when he had finished, one of his disciples said, 'Lord, teach us to pray, as John taught his disciples.' 2 He said to them, 'When you pray, this is what to say: Father, may your name be held holy, your kingdom come; 3 give us each day our daily bread, and forgive us our sins, 4 for we ourselves forgive each one who is in debt to us. And do not put us to the test.' ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Only the seventh day adventists and the Jehovahs Witnesses! deny this teaching of Jesus in scripture! What say you, Little voice?
Cardinal Schonborn didn't even bother using an example of the abused, abandoned woman as you will see from the video of his presentation shortly after the publication of AL when Pope Francis told the press that the Cardinal was the go-to person for an explanation. His pastoral accompaniment boils down to five "intentions": (He does a good impersonation of a kindly, absent minded priest/professor, so go to 27:30 for the essence of his interpretation). 1. How did you treat your children of the first marriage; did you burden them with your marital conflict, making them a hostage of their conflict, damaging them for their whole life? 2. How is the situation with the abandoned spouse? "Our great cities are full of widows of divorces. Some remarry but many others remain alone, isolated, in difficult situations, Before speaking about the mercy of the sacraments we must speak about the mercy of the abandoned spouse, men or women, both; many abandoned men end up on the street. It's always the same story with street people". 3. How did you deal with the hatred and conflict in your marriage? Did you enter a new marriage - a new union with the whole burden of your hatred, the unresolved, unreconciled situation of your previous....your abandoned marriage? Has there been any attempt on your part - both parts - at least to reconcile....not to live in hatred? 4. What example did you give: to the Church; to the society? 5. How is your situation in conscience with God? You cannot betray God. You can make a fuss around with other people but with God you cannot cheat. How is your situation in conscience? It may be the situation that Pope John Paul 11 addresses: that in conscience you are convinced that your first marriage was not valid but what is your situation in conscience, in conscience, that you have broken a valid marriage, and I think that with the attention to these five intentions, the question of the Sacraments comes into another light. It is a serious exam of your own past, your own life. It is a way of conversion. He prefaced all that by saying that many priests in Austria were already giving Communion to remarried divorcees without any questions. He said it was very difficult so I suppose he was presenting this as an improvement. There was no mention of disciplining the priests and no mention of annulment in the "intentions". He quoted St. John Paul's text denying Communion to remarried divorcees unless they fulfilled the obligation to separate by practicing total continence if they had children together but left out the part where St. John Paul based his decision on Sacred Scripture and Tradition. He said that Pope Francis regards such couples as already living a married life. Effectively, what he is describing is "Catholic" divorce based on irreconcilable differences. And here's Archibishop Cupich's (successful) pitch for promotion to Cardinal by way of a press conference . His interpretation extends AL to people in homosexual or any kind of irregular unions - saying it calls out to all Catholics no matter what their situation. He refers to it as "adult spirituality". He confirms that it is a "reform of the Church". The Gospel of Soros from an Archbishop who was promoted shortly afterwards. He gives the impression that the changes were passed with a two-thirds vote but others have cast doubt on that claim. He also says that the Pope is not denying that there is good in homosexual unions but he is merely saying that it is not the position of the Church to put them on the same plain as marriage between a man and woman and that's all the Pope is saying. He said that "the Pope wants to decentralise the Church". Proof, if any were needed, that the Church is already in schism.
Pope Francis is not a reincarnation of Jesus. That claim is reserved for the AC, so it isn't very wise to keep casting the Pope in the role. I wonder how you will feel when Mrs Smith and her wife are serving as Deacons in your parish, possibly leading the youth ministry. Would you put your children in their youth programme?
Quite frankly LV, you either have no idea what you are talking about or you haven't understood the conversation. The woman we have been talking about is repenting of her sins of adultery. She has ceased conjugal relations in her second "marriage" and is in the process of trying to order her life in accordance with what the Church teaches. There are children involved and so the situation is complicated. I know you are trying to help in your own way but you are actually hurting so I suggest we just leave this discussion now. Regarding Canon 1075.2: http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage_print.asp?number=416020&language=en
I reckon she was very sorry when she saw the size of the stones. Jesus had the advantage of knowing her past present and future. In a similar situation, the Church would be limited to knowledge of her past, present and stated intentions for the future, hence the "go and sin no more" requirement for absolution and Communion.
A predictable misread of my post, Dolours. I did NOT compare Pope Francis with Jesus. I compared the way the Jews tried to undermine Jesus with the way critics of Francis (like your good self) today try to undermine the Holy Father.
I quoted Canon 1075.2 from CIC 1917, not 1983. And according this law the woman cannot marry with current partner. She can marry with you, but not with the man, with whom she commited sin of adultery. It is good that they live continent. But they want annulation in contrary to 1075,2, so I translated it as situation, that they want unwittingly other sin! Who doesn't understand is ignorant in CIC.
Thank you Josephite, Dolours, and Clare (and others) for your assistance in defending Martina and her friend from LV. This is a topic that is close to my heart. I have know several abused women in my life. All Martina did was come asking for advice on how to help her friend who desires to stop sinning and wants to order her life along what the Church expects of her. I am embarrassed that she was greeted with stones from some here.
Canon law is changeable upon the whim of the Pope. Do you not feel that the 1983 Code of Canon Law is valid?
Not a misread, David, because you are casting Pope Francis in the role of Jesus who knew the woman's heart. From the Apostles to Pope Benedict, no Pope has opened Communion to people engaging in sexual relations outside a valid marriage. They knew the difference between Jesus and the Pharisees just as well as this Pope, yet you try to convince us that Pope Francis has a closer relationship with the Holy Spirit and knows the mind of Jesus better than any of them. I'm not trying to undermine Pope Francis. He does that all by himself and is destroying the authority of the Petrine office in the process.
A bigger misread than I thought. I haven't said anything about a woman in my post. You are mixing it up with the exchanges going on between LV and others. As for your "not trying to undermine Pope Francis" -
And this is the sick that Holy Law is changeable! Jesus said: Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate! And here few priests in Vatican change God's Law twice in one century! I am absolutely against a divorce. But if I have to accept such human laws I accept all Church laws before 1964.
I know I shouldn't be laughing at something so serious but I have to laugh or cry and I prefer the former.
He didn't tell her to keep on doing what she was doing for the sake of any children she might have had. He was unequivocal. You might say He was rigid. I wouldn't claim to know Our Lord's unexpressed attitude to the matter. I'll stick to what He meant us to hear. If He meant to instigate a gradualist theology, I would think it logical He would have said it. He wasn't shy about saying things that needed to be said. That's what got Him crucified.
