[Grem] Két kiemelkedő katolikus filozófus is kéri F.pápát helyesbítse az 'Amoris Laetitia'-ban leírtakat nyolc ponton

[Emoke Greschik]

*Two leading Catholic philosophers have asked Pope Francis to condemn
errors which may result from “the misuse of his apostolic exhortation
Amoris Laetitia”.*

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/12/09/two-
leading-philosophers-ask-pope-to-condemn-errors-from-misuse-
of-amoris-laetitia/

*Germain Grisez and John Finnis named eight positions 'contrary to Catholic
faith' and asked Francis to condemn them*

In a 37-page letter
<https://www.firstthings.com/uploads/resource_584ae06685216.pdf> to the
Pope, John Finnis and Germain Grisez say that as a papal document Amoris
Laetitia should be presumed to be “consistent” with previous Church
teaching. But they argue that* some passages in the document will be used
to promote errors about marriage, Confession, conscience and the moral law.*

Finnis and Grisez have previously collaborated on works of moral theology.
Finnis is a professor of law at the universities of Oxford and Notre Dame
and a fellow of the British Academy, while Grisez is emeritus professor of
philosophy at Mount St Mary’s University.

*Their letter follows a similar intervention
<http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/07/18/theologians-amoris-laetitia-needs-clarification/>
signed by 45 priests and theologians, which named various propositions to
be condemned, and the five “dubia”
<http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/11/14/pope-declines-to-answer-four-cardinals-amoris-appeal/>
submitted to Pope Francis by four cardinals.*

Finnis and Grisez describe eight positions which are “contrary to Catholic
faith”. The first, which pertains especially to the debate over Communion
for the remarried, is: “A priest administering the Sacrament of
Reconciliation may sometimes absolve a penitent who lacks a purpose of
amendment with respect to a sin in grave matter that either pertains to his
or her ongoing form of life or is habitually repetitive.”

The authors say that some people will use footnote 351
<http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/04/28/amoris-laetitia-footnote-contradicts-churchs-tradition-says-leading-german-philosopher/>
of Amoris Laetitia to argue for this conclusion. *They argue that “there
stands a pastoral practice of the Catholic Church that has the clear marks
of Tradition: a purpose of amendment has been regarded as essential for the
valid reception of the Sacrament of Reconciliation both throughout the
Church and for a very long time.”*

Finnis and Grisez add that* this requirement ”is very strongly grounded in
Scripture”.* Moreover, since sin harms us, “Nothing and no one – not
even God – can put an end to that harm unless one undoes the sinful choice
by making an opposing good free choice. That is why a purpose of amendment
is required for receiving forgiveness.”

Several of the propositions which Finnis and Grisez ask to be condemned
relate to the human ability to follow God’s commandments.* They say that
some will abuse Amoris Laetitia to frame Christian ethics as an “ideal”
which cannot be immediately attained, or to argue that some people are too
weak to avoid grave sins*. Other propositions include: *that “No general
moral rule is exceptionless” and that sometimes breaking a divine
commandment “will be doing one’s best to respond to God.”*

In asking the Pope to condemn these propositions, *they refer to
magisterial teaching, in particular Pope St John Paul II’s Veritatis
Splendor and the Council of Trent. Trent teaches: “If anyone says that the
commandments of God are impossible of observance even by a person justified
and established in grace: let him be anathema.” *Trent opposes “that rash
statement, forbidden by the fathers under anathema, that the commandments
of God are impossible of observance by one who is justified. For God does
not command the impossible, but by commanding he instructs you both to do
what you can and to pray for what you cannot, and he gives you his aid to
enable you.”

*Grisez and Finnis also ask the Pope to reaffirm the Church’s teaching on
sexual ethics, the indissolubility of marriage, and the reality that “many
human beings will end in hell”.*
They sent the letter last month. *They cited the Code of Canon Law to
justify making it public: “According to the knowledge, competence, and
prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty
to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to
the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the
Christian faithful,* without prejudice to the integrity of faith and
morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common
advantage and the dignity of persons.
--------- következő rész ---------
Egy csatolt HTML ĂĄllomĂĄny ĂĄt lett konvertĂĄlva...
URL: http://turul.kgk.uni-obuda.hu/pipermail/grem/attachments/20161211/2016d883/attachment.html