<div dir="ltr"><p><font size="4"><b>Two leading Catholic philosophers have asked Pope Francis to
condemn errors which may result from “the misuse of his apostolic
exhortation Amoris Laetitia”.</b></font></p><p><a href="http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/12/09/two-leading-philosophers-ask-pope-to-condemn-errors-from-misuse-of-amoris-laetitia/" target="_blank">http://www.catholicherald.co.<wbr>uk/news/2016/12/09/two-<wbr>leading-philosophers-ask-pope-<wbr>to-condemn-errors-from-misuse-<wbr>of-amoris-laetitia/</a><br></p>
<p><u><b>Germain Grisez and John Finnis named eight positions 'contrary to Catholic faith' and asked Francis to condemn them</b></u></p><p>In a 37-page <a href="https://www.firstthings.com/uploads/resource_584ae06685216.pdf" target="_blank">letter</a>
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<u><b> some passages in the
document will be used to promote errors about marriage, Confession,
conscience and the moral law.</b></u></p>
<p>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.</p>
<p><u><b>Their letter follows a <a href="http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/07/18/theologians-amoris-laetitia-needs-clarification/" target="_blank">similar intervention</a> signed by 45 priests and theologians, which named various propositions to be condemned, and the five <a href="http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/11/14/pope-declines-to-answer-four-cardinals-amoris-appeal/" target="_blank">“dubia”</a> submitted to Pope Francis by four cardinals.</b></u></p>
<p>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.”</p>
<p>The authors say that some people will use <a href="http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/04/28/amoris-laetitia-footnote-contradicts-churchs-tradition-says-leading-german-philosopher/" target="_blank">footnote 351</a>
of Amoris Laetitia to argue for this conclusion. <u><b>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.”</b></u></p>
<p>Finnis and Grisez add that<u><b> this requirement ”is very strongly
grounded in Scripture”.</b></u> 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.”</p>
<p>Several of the propositions which Finnis and Grisez ask to be
condemned relate to the human ability to follow God’s commandments.<b> 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</b>. Other propositions include:
<b>that “No general moral rule is exceptionless” and that sometimes
breaking a divine commandment “will be doing one’s best to respond to
God.”</b></p>
<p>In asking the Pope to condemn these propositions, <b><u>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.</u>” </b>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.”</p>
<p><u><b>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”.</b></u></p>
They sent the letter last month. <u><b>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,</b></u> without prejudice to the integrity of
faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to
common advantage and the dignity of persons.</div>