Even the Philosophers Are “Correcting” Each Other. Buttiglione and Pierantoni in a Duel Over “Amoris Laetitia”

Even the Philosophers Are “Correcting” Each Other. Buttiglione and Pierantoni in a Duel Over “Amoris Laetitia”

Sandro Magister

11/13/17

Francis is certainly not a philosopher pope, seeing the nonchalance with which he mistreats the principle of non-contradiction and the inconsistency of the four postulates on which he says his thought is based.

Curiously, however, he is offering rich material for “disputatio” to none other than the philosophers. One of these, Rocco Buttiglione, took to the field a few days ago to demolish point by point the “Correctio Filialis” sent to the pope last August 11 by 40 Catholic scholars from all over the world, most of them also philosophers, with the request to correct seven heresies lurking – in their judgment – in the eighth chapter of  “Amoris Laetitia.”

Buttiglione formulated his apologia for pope’s perfect orthodoxy in this interview with Andrea Tornielli in Vatican Insider of October 3:

> “The ‘Correctio’? The method is incorrect: they do not discuss, they condemn”

And now here comes another philosopher who is counterattacking, dismantling Buttiglione’s ideas in turn and once again criticizing “Amoris Laetitia.”

He does so in an interview with Diane Montagna on LifeSiteNews on October 10:

> “Amoris Laetitia” uses orthodoxy as “mask” to conceal moral errors: Catholic philosopher

The philosopher in question is Professor Claudio Pierantoni (photo), who teaches medieval philosophy at the Universidad de Chile and is one of the signers of the “Correctio.”

The “Correctio” is certainly not immune from objections, both of method and of content, like those formulated a few days ago on Settimo Cielo by another scholar of philosophy, Francesco Arzillo.

But neither is “Amoris Laetitia” innocent, seeing the babel of contrasting interpretations that it has generated, on the part of entire episcopacies, of individual bishops, of theologians, and indeed of philosophers.

Buttiglione and Pierantoni know each other very well. The former – a well-known scholar of, among other things, the philosophical thought of Karol Wojtyla – has been for many years in Chile one of the most renowned professors, with Pierantoni among his students, of the International Academy of Philosophy founded by the illustrious Austrian philosopher Josef Seifert. And – what do you know – Seifert was recently expelled from the Granada branch of his academy at the order of the city’s archbishop, precisely for having publicly criticized, in the light of “pure logic,” a key passage of “Amoris Laetitia.”

The complete text of the interview with Pierantoni is available on LifeSiteNews.

An extract of its central portion at Settimo Cielo.

Facebook
Twitter
Google+
http://angelqueen.org/2017/10/13/even-the-philosophers-are-correcting-each-other-buttiglione-and-pierantoni-in-a-duel-over-amoris-laetitia/
Get AQ Email Updates
AQ RSS Feed

4 comments on “Even the Philosophers Are “Correcting” Each Other. Buttiglione and Pierantoni in a Duel Over “Amoris Laetitia”

  1. Disagreement among philosophers is one thing; leading souls to Hell with false interpretations of Church teaching is quite another.



  2. Captain Kirk: Mister Spock! Catholic philosophers correcting each other over Amoris Laetitia and the Correctio Filialis detailing heresies propagated by the Pope’s ambiguity… analyze using your usual superior Vulcan logic which we no longer call “superior” to avoid triggering sensitive liberals and progressive Social Justice Warriors less familiar with Aristotelian logic, due to changes in curriculum, who might consider such displays of logic to be oppressive microaggressions and signs of excessive rigidity.



    Spock: Fascinating, Captain. It should come as no surprise that many Catholic teachings are rooted in reason, given the Aristotelian theoretical foundations of Thomistic philosophy and metaphysics. Even with the Holy Father’s abiding pleas for mercy and dialogue, since many issues in modern philosophy are far from settled it is understandable that philosophers come into conflict in such debates, Jim.





    Captain Kirk: Does the Land O’Lakes conference figure into this, Mister Spock?



    Spock: Affirmative, Captain. The quest for academic prestige and ecumenical dialogue in the modernist Spirit of Vatican II led to much confusion in philosophical circles.
    Although Wittgenstein and Husserl did not come up in the exchanges between Professor Buttiglione and Pierantoni, there is much room for more confusion in these debates over Amoris Laetitia. I understand that there is an Opus Dei supernumerary preparing the John Rawls defense of the Holy Father’s situation ethics in Amoris Laetitia, as we speak.





    Mike Brady: Wittgenstein? I wonder if Carol would buy that…. On the other hand, a John Rawls excuse for adultery and remarriage, couldn’t hurt.



    Father Mulcahy, S.J.: That would be confusing.



    Doctor Strangelove; Ziss ist ze genius of ze seamless garment of Amoris Laetitia, ja.



    Robin: Holy bigamy, Batman! Can they do that?



    Batman: The hermeneutics of situation ethics in the modernist dialectic can get very tricky, Robin.



    Father Mulcahy, S.J.: Of course, deliberately fomenting heresy and spreading confusion to lead others into sin would be some kind of sin itself.





    Walker Percy: What about Kierkegaard?



    Father Fitzgibbon: Kierkegaard?



    Kierkegaard: There is always enough time to discuss Angst.





    Reverend Neuhaus: That’s my opening….Forgive me for interrupting again as aggressive and pushy professional Protestant converts sometimes do, but speaking as a semi-recovering former Lutheran familiar with the pitfalls of eliminating reason and logic from discussions of religion, this might be a good time to discuss the Naked Public Square in modernity, Max Weber’s concept of disenchantment in modern culture, and Professor Taylor’s secularization theories….


























  3. Reverend Sloan: Forgive me for butting in, but you have to bracket the first marriage.



    Father O’Malley: How’s that?



    Professor Husserl: He means the phenomenological epoché.



    Father O’Malley: We didn’t cover that at St. Mary’s.



    Father Drinan, S.J.: We suspend any consideration of the metaphysical status of the first marriage. Like with the unborn.



    Father Fitzgibbon: Come again, Father?





    Father Mulcahy,S.J.: From the Greek ἐποχή. Father Gannon and Professor von Hildebrand had many heated discussions over this at Fordham back in the old days.



    Gilligan: Epoché?



    The Professor: Yes, of course. From the Greek ἐποχή.



    Father Fitzgibbon: She’s marryin’ a Greek fella, eh?



    Father Mulcahy, S.J.: Of course, in ancient Pyrrhonism a consideration of epoché would require a review of the Ten Modes of Aenesidemus …



    Ward Cleaver: Ten Modes of Aenesidemus?



    Father Fitzgibbon: Is he the new fullback playing for Rockne at Notre Dame?



    Major Nelson: They better not have a new fullback. I put a lot of money down on the USC Trojans winning the Notre Dame game…



    Knute Rockne: Now, understand, I can’t have players exhausting their brains, chasing a lot of neo-Kantian and phenomenological mazes around all week.

Leave a Reply