[Grem] !!! "F.pápának vissza kell vonnia az Amor.Laetitaban tett ERETNEK kijelentéseit!" / katolikus filozófusok, teológusok

[Emoke Greschik]

Josef Seifert, katolikus filozĂłfus ĂŠs mĂĄs katolikus filozĂłfusok, teolĂłgusok
szerint, Ferenc pĂĄpĂĄnak az Amoris Laetitia apostoli buzdĂ­tĂĄsban tett *eretnek
kijelentĂŠseit* vissza kell vonnia!



Top philosopher: Pope must revoke ‘objectively heretical’ statements to
avoid schism

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/top-philosopher-pope-must-
revoke-objectively-heretical-statements-to-avoid

September 21, 2016 (LifeSiteNews <http://www.lifesitenews.com>) —* Josef
Seifert, Austrian Catholic philosopher and close friend of the late Pope
St. John Paul II, said *in a new interview that *he hopes Pope Francis
revokes the “objectively heretical” statements in Amoris Laetitia to avoid
“schism,” “heresy,” and “the complete split in the Church.”*

Speaking to Gloria.TV about a letter he wrote Pope Francis and an essay
<http://aemaet.de/index.php/aemaet/article/view/35/pdf> he penned outlining*
some of his concerns with the exhortation,* Seifert explained that there
are four conclusions one can draw from *Amoris Laetitia*.

These four conclusions “are radically distinct and therefore I think one
must clarify which is the true answer,” he said.

The first conclusion is that* it remains sacrilegious for those in a state
of unrepentant mortal sin* *to receive Holy Communion*,* even though
footnote 351 opens the door for this.*

Supporters of this argument “can say that* the text is not a magisterial
document,* like Cardinal Burke says, that it is not a document that has the
proper form to change the Catholic catechism [and] the 2,000-year-old
tradition of sacramental discipline by a few stroke[s] of pen. … So nothing
changed, basically, and* the document perhaps tried to change something* *but
it didn’t change anything.”*

*“The second [conclusion] is the opposite — the contrary and absolute and
radical opposite,” Seifert said. “And that is that every couple, all
homosexuals, all lesbians, all adulterers, all remarried, not remarried —
everybody is welcome at the table of the Lord.*” He noted that this is
essentially the interpretation embraced by the bishops of the Philippines
<https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-approved-newspaper-exhortation-allows-holy-communion-for-remarried>,
who “made a big pronouncement to this effect.”

*“This interpretation* cannot be what the pope really means — must not be
what the pope really means because it *leads to countless sacrileges,* *all
kinds of grave sinners [coming] out to the Sacrament of Holy Communion,”*
Seifert said. Allowing *this “opens the door to transforming the Church,
temple of God, [into] a kind of temple of Satan.”*

*Seifert called on Pope Francis to* “*absolutely and obligatorily declare
that this [interpretation] is a completely false understanding of the
Church teaching.”*
*Internal forum would be a ‘pastoral catastrophe’ *

*The third possible interpretation of Amoris Laetitia *is that *couples may
“discern” with the help of a priest whether they are really guilty of the
actions they continually commit, which the Church labels objectively
sinful.*

“How should that be applied?” Seifert asked. “Should a priest say to the
one adulterer, ‘you are a good adulterer, you are in the state of grace,
you are [a] very pious person, so you get my absolution without changing
your life and then [you can] go to Holy Communion. … And then come another,
and he says, ‘Oh, and you are a real adulterer. You must first confess, you
must revoke your life, you must change your life, and then you can go to
Communion.’ I mean, how should that work?”

*This “seems completely inappropriate” and could become a “pastoral
catastrophe,”* Seifert warned. He said *it could also confuse Catholic
divorced and remarried couples, some of whom might be told by their priest
to go ahead and receive Holy Communion and others who might be told by the
same priest to live abstinently in order to receive Holy Communion.*
Seifert noted that this third conclusion contains “*the problem of logical
fallacy”* that assumes that if a person “doesn’t understand that what he
does is wrong, that he is innocent and in a state of grace, but the
blindness for the wrongness of an action can be itself gravely [sinful].”

“It’s a false assumption that the many couples who do not find anything
wrong with remarrying and getting divorced are all innocent sinners in the
state of grace, because their blindness [to the fact that they are
committing adultery] itself [may be a sin],” Seifert said.
*Seeming ‘denial of hell’ must be corrected ‘for clarity’s sake’*

According to Seifert, *the fourth possible interpretation of Amoris
Laetitia *is *people can say in good conscience that their first marriage
was invalid, even if an ecclesiastical court has said otherwise, and
therefore may divorce, “marry” again, and receive the Sacraments while
maintaining a sexual relationship with their second spouse.*

*“It must not be left to the conscience of the individual to judge whether
or not his marriage was valid, and also not to the judgment of a single
priest, because to judge … the existence of a Sacrament requires a careful
investigation and that’s [exactly] the task of Church tribunals *and
therefore one simply cannot … in conscience say, I was not married and now
I marry again,” Seifert explained. He also said *the notion that a person
can declare for himself that his marriage was invalid was condemned by the
Council of Trent and therefore is NOT harmonious with Church teaching.*

*It is “objectively heretical” **to claim*, as *Amoris Laetitia* does,*
that someone may be simply unable* *to live according to the demands of the
Gospel, *Seifert said. *Amoris Laetitia* suggests that people can
“recognize that it’s God’s will to live in an adulterous
relationship,” but *“that
contradicts clearly* *quite a few dogmas of the Tridentine Council and* *it
clearly contradicts* *Veritatis Splendor and other solemn teachings of the
Church,*” he said.

*Seifert stressed that he was not calling the pope a heretic, simply
pointing out that he made* *heretical statements that **should be
corrected.*

“*He (Pope Fr.) says **that (")nobody is condemned forever(") *… which in
the context can be interpreted in different ways, but it’s hard to
interpret it in any other way than *denial of hell,”* he said. *Christ
“warns us for **the great, real danger of eternal damnation*,”* as have
many saints and the Blessed Virgin Mary in apparitions approved by the
Church, “and therefore,** for the pope to invite people in a serious state
of sin to go to* *the Sacraments **and at the same time to say* *nobody
will be condemned forever,* I think *risks to be understood that* *he (Pope
Fr.)  denies the possibility of damnation.”*

“So I told the pope that he has to first of all clarify that he didn’t want
to deny hell in this statement, which would be against the Holy Scripture,
and against several [dogmas*],” Seifert said. Even if Pope Francis didn’t
mean the statement to seem to be a denial of hell, “I think many people
understand it in that way and he should therefore clearly say what is the
truth of the Gospel *and not appear to deny hell,” he said. This must be
done for “clarity’s sake and for pastoral care.”
*Seifert will speak up ‘even if I am murdered for it’*

Pope Francis would only “grow in esteem and respect in the world” if he
retracted the statements in *Amoris Laetitia* that seemingly contradict
Catholic doctrine, Seifert said. If he “persists in it,” then there is the
“danger of schism.”

“To avoid schism and to avoid heresy and to avoid the complete split in the
Church, I think it is necessary that the pope … be told [these] problems”
and revoke them, Seifert said.

Seifert pointed out that he is not the only Catholic academic raising the
alarm about *Amoris Laetitia*. *Professor Robert Spaemann, a leading German
philosophy professor and close friend of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, and
Dr. Jude P. Dougherty
<https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/45-catholic-academics-urge-cardinals-to-ask-pope-francis-to-fix-exhortation>,
the dean emeritus of the School of Philosophy at Catholic University of
America, both raised serious concerns with the exhortation. *The former
called it a “breach” with Catholic tradition
<https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/popes-exhortation-is-a-breach-with-catholic-tradition-leading-german-philos>
and the latter wrote that Pope Francis’ ambiguity means “what was certain
before has become problematic.”

“Even if I am murdered for it, I think I have to speak up because *one
cannot remain* *silent** if one feels that **important truths which are
also very important for the eternal salvation of the faithful **are
obscured *… in the document,” Seifert said.
--------- következő rész ---------
Egy csatolt HTML ĂĄllomĂĄny ĂĄt lett konvertĂĄlva...
URL: http://turul.kgk.uni-obuda.hu/pipermail/grem/attachments/20161002/94a7b99e/attachment.html