Should Amoris Laetitia be taken as "authentic magisterium" statement?
- Thread starter 1Thess521
- Start date
Mysterium Fidei
Well-known member
I'll hold off and see if any CARM "Catholics" want to tackle this one. ?
Atemi
Well-known member
We all know they will determine that on the fly.
In the future, it will depend on which Catholic you are talking to and what argument they are trying to win. They will change their minds from thread to thread.
And those that do privately interpret it to be "authentic magisterium" will insist it does not mean what it clearly says...whenever convenient.
Mysterium Fidei
Well-known member
Have you come up with any examples of contradictory teachings in the 1958 years of the Catholic Church before Vatican II were the Church infallibly taught one thing in one time and then, in a different time, taught something completely contradictory? There are supposed to be loads and loads of examples, according to you.
Atemi
Well-known member
I already posted one for you in this thread. Did you forget Vat I?
Mysterium Fidei
Well-known member
Where have all the CARM "Catholics" gone?
Mysterium Fidei
Well-known member
Right OK
Atemi
Well-known member
Dude, your entire thread revolves around refusing submission to Vat I.
How is the irony lost on you?
Mysterium Fidei
Well-known member
Either you are not capable of understanding the sedevacantist position, or you are just completely dishonest.
Atemi
Well-known member
Either you posted this or you did not:
Archbishop Vigino goes scorched earth! Bergoglio is not a valid pope!
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò who served as the Apostolic Nuncio to the United States until 2016, released a video that was supposed to be played at the so called, "Catholic Identity Conference", which is a gathering of "conservative" Novus Ordites that was recently held in Pittsburgh. It turns...
forums.carm.org
This is not a win for your position unless Vat I is ignored. We do not have to go that far back.
Mysterium Fidei
Well-known member
Since apparently no CARM "Catholics" want to answer, or have the ability to answer the OP. I'll give my (correct) answer.
Papal magisterium is always binding. The non-infallible magisterium of the pope is truly binding since it is authentic (authoritative).
The authentic magisterium of the pope is ordered to the salvation of souls, since the end of papal authority is the salvation of souls. This means that an authentic papal teaching cannot contain anything unsafe, i.e., able to lead people to Hell.
The 'authentic papal teaching' of 'Pope Francis' contains errors that are not safe to follow, such as the tacit approval of adultery, sodomy, and religious indifferentism, among many other things.
Therefore, either Bergoglio is not a true pope, or the Catholic Church has defected.
1Thess521
Well-known member
from 3 days ago,,
"The responsa also affirmed that bishops should develop Amoris Laetitia-based criteria in their dioceses that “can help priests in the accompaniment and discernment of divorced people living in a new union,” and that bishops of the Buenos Aires’ pastoral region’s application of Amoris, which Francis called “the only interpretation,” should be taken as “authentic magisterium” and that no other comprehensive explanation would be forthcoming."
Vatican responds to Cardinal Duka’s dubia
Originally submitted by the archbishop emeritus of Prague on July 13, the DDF’s response had been issued to the Czech cardinal Sept. 25.
www.catholicnewsagency.com
Mysterium Fidei
Well-known member
Bergoglio signed a text affirming Amoris Laetitia allows Communion for divorced and 'remarried.' Adultery is enshrined into the Novus Ordo magisterium just as sodomy now is.from 3 days ago,,
"The responsa also affirmed that bishops should develop Amoris Laetitia-based criteria in their dioceses that “can help priests in the accompaniment and discernment of divorced people living in a new union,” and that bishops of the Buenos Aires’ pastoral region’s application of Amoris, which Francis called “the only interpretation,” should be taken as “authentic magisterium” and that no other comprehensive explanation would be forthcoming."
Vatican responds to Cardinal Duka’s dubia
Originally submitted by the archbishop emeritus of Prague on July 13, the DDF’s response had been issued to the Czech cardinal Sept. 25.
romishpopishorganist
Well-known member
The document is a papal encyclical, is it not?
Thus, it is magisterial. Does the document bind the Christian conscience? No. I see nothing in that document compelling Catholics to assent to what the document teaches with the assent of Faith.
Anything the pope does in an official capacity is an exercise of "authentic magisterium." It does not entail everything the pope says and does binds the Christian conscience or demands the assent of Faith.
romishpopishorganist
Well-known member
Maybe they just aren't interested in this thread?
1Thess521
Well-known member
Can "authentic magisterium" documents and teachings be in error?
Atemi
Well-known member
- Both clergy and faithful,
- of whatever rite and dignity,
- both singly and collectively,
- are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this
- not only in matters concerning faith and morals,
- but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the church throughout the world.
You are bound to submit to and obey everything in that document that addresses faith, morals, discipline, or church government.
romishpopishorganist
Well-known member
I just said that papal encyclicals do not necessarily demand the assent of Faith.
Only those teachings that demand the assent of Faith are guaranteed. Teachings that do not demand the assent of Faith may or may not require obedience, but they are not considered unchangeable or infallible.
Do not conflate teachings which demand obedience to demand the assent of Faith. Just becasue we have to obey a teaching does not entail the teaching binds us to assent in Faith.
1Thess521
Well-known member
that is not what I asked
(and you know it)
I asked
Can "authentic magisterium" documents and teachings be in error?
I did not ask if they were required: I asked about error.
romishpopishorganist
Well-known member
Sir, I am sick of answering questions only to be asked the exact same question again, and again, and again. My answer, sir, is not going to change.
This is the LAST time I am answering this. Follow the bouncing ball:
EVERY document that "Rome" puts out is an authentic exercise of the magisterium.
However, there are LEVELS of assent when it comes to the exercise of the "authentic magisterium." In other words, sir, not every exercise of the "authentic exercise" of the magisterium requires the assent of Faith.
Those exercises of the "authentic magisterium" that do NOT require the assent of Faith are NOT protected; that is to say, in theory they could be in error. Only those exercises of the "authentic magisterium" that require the assent of Faith are what are protected from error.
Thus, the answer to your question is going to depend on whether the exercise of the "authentic magisterium" demands the assent of Faith.
For example: in 1854, Pius IX defined the IC. That was an exercise of the "authentic magisterium" that required the assent of Faith. Thus, this exercise of the "authentic magisterium" is protected from error.
Amoris Laetitia is an exercise of the "authentic magisterium" but does not require the assent of Faith. It is not protected with the Grace of infallibility, sir. In theory, it may contain errors. That does not mean it does contain errors, it just means it isn't guaranteed.
Now, is any of this unclear?