Vatican summit to assess 10 years of ‘trying to live’ Amoris Laetitia Vatican officials say the Amoris Laetitia summit will examine what the Church has ‘learned’ from a decade of 'trying to live' the document rather than evaluating the text itself & Catholic Monitor vs. ChatGPT
Vatican summit to assess 10 years of ‘trying to live’ Amoris Laetitia
Yes. I can reconstruct the substance of our earlier back-and-forth, but I don't have a verbatim transcript of every turn. The earlier discussion developed roughly like this:
Our earlier exchange
You: The key issue is whether Francis's Buenos Aires position conflicts with what John Paul II taught in Familiaris Consortio 84.
Me: Initially, I framed the issue as potentially a question of whether Francis changed a disciplinary/prudential application rather than a doctrine of divine law.
You: You objected that this was too easy. John Paul II did not present the Eucharistic restriction merely as a changeable discipline. Familiaris Consortio 84 grounds it in the indissolubility of marriage, Christ's teaching, the objective condition of the couple, and the nature of the Eucharist.
Me: I agreed that this substantially strengthens the objection. The question therefore cannot simply be settled by saying:
“John Paul II had one discipline and Francis adopted another.”
The prior question is whether the reason underlying John Paul II's discipline is itself binding by divine law.
Then we examined the Buenos Aires position
Me: Francis's endorsement of the Buenos Aires guidelines means that, in particular circumstances, a divorced-and-remarried person may receive Reconciliation and the Eucharist despite being unable to fulfill the traditional requirement of continence, when subjective responsibility is sufficiently diminished.
You: But that creates a serious problem if the earlier prohibition was based on the objective situation, rather than merely subjective culpability.
Me: Right. The distinction became:
- Objective situation: the person is living in a union contrary to the existing marriage bond.
- Subjective culpability: the person's knowledge, freedom, circumstances, etc.
- Sacramental discipline: whether that person can receive absolution and Communion.
The Buenos Aires approach gives diminished subjective culpability a role in determining sacramental access that appears difficult to reconcile with the earlier formulation if the latter's exclusion was based upon the objective sacramental situation itself.
You then pushed the divine-law argument further
You essentially argued:
If John Paul II explicitly grounded the prohibition in divine law, Christ's teaching, the objective reality of marriage, and the Eucharist, then it is insufficient to defend Francis merely by calling John Paul II's prohibition “disciplinary.”
And we refined that into:
The decisive question is whether Francis changed a merely disciplinary rule or changed the practical application of a principle that the preceding magisterium itself presented as rooted in divine law.
That was the point at which the issue became much more serious than a disagreement about pastoral style.
Then came Leo the Great
I had originally brought up Leo the Great as a possible historical precedent for admitting a divorced/remarried person under certain circumstances.
You correctly objected that this was not an adequate precedent.
I then explicitly corrected the earlier presentation:
Leo the Great was not a straightforward papal-magisterial precedent for the Buenos Aires position.
The relevant historical case was better characterized as a pastoral accommodation by an individual Father, rather than a papal teaching establishing a universal sacramental principle.
We connected that with the CDF/Ratzinger material you had cited concerning the Fathers: isolated pastoral solutions should not simply be treated as though they constituted the Church's universal doctrine or discipline.
So we abandoned the argument:
“Leo did something similar, therefore Francis has precedent.”
That was too strong.
Then we reached the formulation you particularly emphasized
We arrived at essentially this:
“I cannot responsibly name a pre-Francis pope as having taught Francis's Buenos Aires position as magisterial teaching on the basis of the Leo evidence.”
And then:
“If John Paul II's prohibition was grounded in divine law, Christ's teaching, and the objective Eucharistic meaning of marriage—as John Paul II explicitly said—then Francis cannot be defended merely by labeling the earlier prohibition ‘disciplinary.’”
And the stronger question became:
“Is Francis's new sacramental principle incompatible with a doctrine that the preceding magisterium itself presented as divine law?”
That was the central formulation we were building toward.
Finally, we separated that question from the heresy question
I also corrected an earlier tendency to jump too quickly from doctrinal conflict to “Francis is a heretic.”
We distinguished:
- Is there a real conflict between the two propositions?
- Is the earlier proposition actually definitive/divine-law doctrine?
- Is the apparent conflict capable of reconciliation through a legitimate development of doctrine?
- If there is contradiction, is Francis's position material error or formal/pertinacious heresy?
- Only after those questions would the canonical consequences of a formally heretical pope become relevant.
We also discussed St. Francis de Sales, whose Catholic Controversy passage you supplied, concerning an explicitly heretical pope losing the dignity of the papacy ipso facto, while recognizing that the theological question of loss of office and the Church's juridical recognition of that fact are distinct issues.
Where we had landed
The strongest version of our argument was therefore not simply:
“Francis contradicted John Paul II.”
It was:
The Buenos Aires interpretation is now officially characterized as authentic Magisterium, but that official status does not itself demonstrate its compatibility with the preceding magisterium. The crucial doctrinal question is whether Familiaris Consortio 84's exclusion of those living in a new union without continence was merely disciplinary, or whether John Paul II grounded it in principles of divine law and the objective sacramental meaning of marriage and the Eucharist. If the latter, then the burden is to explain how Buenos Aires can introduce a different sacramental conclusion without contradicting that prior principle.
I ask all The Catholic Monitor readers to also pray for the end of this war. Watch "Trump Calls Putin To Get Iran War Offramp! w/ Scott Ritter" on YouTube: ...Read more Please Pray for Trump to end the Iran War: Watch "Trump Calls Putin To Get Iran War Offramp! w/ Scott Ritter" on YouTubeFranklin & Graham calls on Christians to pray for 'end to the bloodshed' ahead of Trump-Putin summit...7mo
|
Conclave Notes:
-- Open letter urges Pope Leo XIV to correct ‘scandalous incoherence’ in Amoris Laetitia...[Wow! Even notorious Popesplainer Fr.] Harrison warns that Pope Francis taught a ‘dangerous self-contradiction’ on Communion for the divorced and ‘remarried,’ petitioning Pope Leo to correct the record. [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2025/08/open-letter-urges-pope-leo-xiv-to.html]
-- Are the Cardinals who will participate in the upcoming conclave authentically appointed & morally justified in voting, or will the shadow of Francis's possible illegitimacy cast itself over the next papacy? [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2025/04/are-cardinals-who-will-participate-in.html]
-- 5 Dubia Questions for 1P5's Steve Skojec & All faithful Catholics especially Francis is definitely Pope Cardinals, Bishops & pundits [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/06/5-dubia-questions-for-steve-skojec.html]
Francis Notes:
l– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:
“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)
Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]
– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html
– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html
– If Francis betrays Benedict XVI & the”Roman Rite Communities” like he betrayed the Chinese Catholics we must respond like St. Athanasius, the Saintly English Bishop Robert Grosseteste & “Eminent Canonists and Theologians” by “Resist[ing]” him: https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/12/if-francis-betrays-benedict-xvi.html
– LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:
The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”
– On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:
“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”
– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:
“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.
Election Notes:
– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]
– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html
– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1
– A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020:
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1
What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the [J6] DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”:
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1]
Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it.
Pray an Our Father now for America.
Comments