Sunday, April 10, 2016

A Cooler Look at Pp. Francis' "Joy of Love"

The current Pope is inclined to write with maximum un-clarity, except when he puts up straw-men. 

But he hasn't changed a thing with his letter on the joy of love.

Ed Peters, a very good Canon lawyer, starts at the beginning:

Holy Communion is to be withheld from divorced-and-remarried Catholics in virtue of Canon 915 which, as has been explained countless times, does not require Catholic ministers to read the souls of would-be communicants, but rather, directs ministers to withhold holy Communion from those who, as an external and observable matter, “obstinately persevere in manifest grave sin”. The Catechism of the Catholic Church 2384 describes civil remarriage after divorce as “public and permanent adultery” (something obviously gravely sinful), so, if Francis had wanted to authorize the administration of holy Communion to divorced-and-remarried Catholics (and he did not want to repudiate CCC 2384, 1650, etc.) he would have had to have wrought a change in the law contained in Canon 915....

Pp. Francis did not do so.  Of course, Canon 915 is ignored by most parish priests, Bishops, and (US) Cardinals.  That's their problem--and the problem of those who are in a state of adultery and still receive Communion.


Anonymous said...

It is not that Pope Francis writes in ambiguous prose. He writes in ecclesial dialogue. His style is not unclear. It is quite clearly decentralized. His language awakens and invites the contributions of the Vatican's various dicasteries, the clarifications of cardinals and bishops around the world, and the voices and experiences of laypersons. Those who have read Evangelii Gaudium nn. 16 and 27 get that. Now it is time for other observers to catch up.

Dad29 said...

When one is El Primo, one does not "invite clarification."

Observant laymen get that.

Dad29 said...

More fully: the Pope's M.O. in communicating, even with an 'exhortation' which is decidedly not doctinal/dogmatic, could be described as imprudent by an informed layman who 'gets' Marshall McLuhan.

Peters' post (and Cdl. Burke's essay on the topic) both 'clarify' HH's text.

They also 'clarify' the scandalous laxity surrounding Canon 915 in the West.

Informed laymen "get" that, as well.

Anonymous said...

I am afraid the days of papal monarchy are over. The authentic and normative ecclesiology of Vatican II, something Archbishop Listecki has discoursed on admirably in his most recent pastoral letter, is both decentralized and episcopally sensitive. Pope Francis' writing and speaking style reflect the doctrinal demands of the day.

Dad29 said... long as the Rota is in Rome and governed directly by the Pope, the 'monarchy' remains intact.

By the way, your use of the term "monarchy" is clever, but (as you should know) inaccurate. The King is Christ. Peter is His representative. And--as you ALSO should know--Pp. Francis has yet to remark on "doctrine," other than to leave it intact.

Circumlocute as you will; nothing has changed, except the Pope's remarkable ability to be imprudent in his speechifying and letter-writing.