Rome is buzzing with questions on the four Cardinals’ objections to Amoris Laetitia

Rome is buzzing with questions on the four Cardinals’ objections to Amoris Laetitia

John-Henry Westen

ROME, November 21, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) — With many of the world’s cardinals gathered for the Consistory that added 17 to their number and the closed the Year of Mercy, Rome was abuzz with the story of the four Cardinals who presented a set of yes-or-no questions to the Pope seeking clarity on the Pope’s recent Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia.

At the reception for the three new American cardinals at the Pontifical North American College, each was asked about the so-called “dubia” and the Pope’s refusal to answer.

Cardinal Kevin Farrell, who recently had the media follow his war of words with Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput over Amoris Laetitia, might have felt a little gun-shy. When a reporter in the halls at the reception asked him for his reaction, he pushed a recorder away with his hand, saying rather gruffly he didn’t want to answer that.

Cardinal Joseph Tobin, however, was ready with answers for The Tablet on the same question. In remarks very similar to those of new Cardinal Blase Cupich, Tobin called the Dubia to the Pope by the four Cardinals “troublesome” and said, “The Holy Father is capturing the work of two synods, so if four cardinals say that two synods were wrong, or that somehow the Holy Father didn’t reflect what was said in those synods, I think that should be questioned.”

Adding that the matters dealt with in Amoris Laetitia were complex, Tobin quipped, “just to simply reduce it to a ‘dubium,’ I think it is at best naive.”

Cardinal Cupich answered the National Catholic Register’s Edward Pentin on the matter, saying of Amoris Laetitia: “The document that they are having doubts about are the fruits of two synods, and the fruit of propositions that were voted on by two-thirds of the bishops who were there.”

Cupich added, “I think that if you begin to question the legitimacy or what is being said in such a document, do you throw into question then all the other documents that have been issued before by the other popes. So I think it’s not for the pope to respond to that, it’s a moment for anyone who has doubts to examine how they got to that position because it is a magisterial document of the Catholic Church.”

The “dubia,” of course, regarded clearing up the opposite interpretations of Amoris Laetitia among bishops and theologians rather than the document itself. Nonetheless, Cardinal Cupich claimed that the four Cardinals needed conversion. “The Holy Father doesn’t have to defend a teaching document of the Church,” he said. “It’s up to those who have doubts or questions to have conversion in their lives.”

The animosity toward the four Cardinals coming from the Pope and his closest collaborators was expected. That is why the letter to the Pope containing the “dubia” was signed by three retired Cardinals and Cardinal Raymond Burke, who has already been removed from his Vatican post. “For good reason,” Vatican sources told LifeSiteNews, others who supported the letter could not sign on for fear of losing their positions.

Belying the animosity directed at the four Cardinals asking the Pope for clarification on Amoris Laetitia, their letter was the kindest and most humble expression of concern. “Compelled in conscience by our pastoral responsibility and desiring to implement ever more that synodality to which Your Holiness urges us, we, with profound respect, permit ourselves to ask you, Holy Father,” is how the Cardinals began their question. Addressing the Pope as the “Supreme Teacher of the Faith,” they asked him to “resolve the uncertainties and bring clarity, benevolently giving a response to the ‘dubia’ that we attach to the present letter.”

Facebook
Twitter
Google+
http://angelqueen.org/2016/11/21/rome-is-buzzing-with-questions-on-the-four-cardinals-objections-to-amoris-laetitia/
Get AQ Email Updates
AQ RSS Feed

One comment on “Rome is buzzing with questions on the four Cardinals’ objections to Amoris Laetitia

  1. “Tobin called the Dubia to the Pope by the four Cardinals ‘troublesome'”
    Well, that’s true enough; it’s troublesome to modernists.
    ““The Holy Father is capturing the work of two synods, so if four cardinals say that two synods were wrong, or that somehow the Holy Father didn’t reflect what was said in those synods, I think that should be questioned.”
    Indeed it should be questioned –Tobin’s obviously ignorant and/or stupid and/or malicious sophism, that is. Tobin assumes that his listeners are so ignorant of the history of things that they are unaware that
    1) The synods were stacked by the pope with those favoring his own liberal theology.
    2) Even though the synods were stacked, they STILL had to be manipulated by key henchman of Francis (Bruno Debile, Baldisarri, etc.) in order to steer the results in the desired direction.
    3) In spite of these manuvers, the final Relatio nevertheless did not specifically approve giving Communion to those living in adulterous unions, so no one can say that the synod backed this idea. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Ordinary_General_Assembly_of_the_Synod_of_Bishops#Final_report
    In any case, it doesn’t MATTER whether the synod approved giving Communion to those in an objective state of adultery (or any other kind of mortal sin), even in special cases. It doesn’t MATTER if the pope wants to do this, as he has clearly stated that he does. It’s against DIVINE law. St. Paul himself forbade it, and Church Tradition, which is infallible on matters of faith or morals, has always held to it.

    “Cupich added, ‘I think that if you begin to question the legitimacy or what is being said in such a document, do you throw into question then all the other documents that have been issued before by the other popes? So I think it’s not for the pope to respond to that, it’s a moment for anyone who has doubts to examine how they got to that position because it is a magisterial document of the Catholic Church.'”
    So Cupich also is either ignorant, stupid or malicious.
    Can he truly be unaware of the thing we call the ‘theological note’ of a teaching of the Church? Does he really think that infallible Tradition, having the note of De Fide (i.e. must be believed by divine faith under pain of heresy), is on the same level of authority as statements contained in a mere Apostolic Exhortation, none of which statements express the pope’s desire to invoke his infallibility? Where do we see an “anathema sit” in Mortis Tristitia? Where do we see a “we pronounce, declare and define”? He’s comparing apples to oranges.
    Finally, it has to be said that EVEN IF the pope used terms intending to invoke infallibility, if his decrees contradict anything that has been previously infallibly defined, they are null and void. It is metaphysically impossible for two contradictories to both be true, and again, the faith and morals of the Church are eternally immutable, so no one can say “Oh, well such and such was infallibly true indeed, but only for its time.”
    Does anyone really think that these damnably hypocritical liberals, who are now crying up Universal Papal Infallibilism, had “conversion of their lives” when Humanae Vitae came out?
    For God’s sake, as the Dubia point out, Francis And The Destroyers are even blatantly negging authoritative statements of popes as recent, and as liberal, as JP II.

Leave a Reply