|
Post by Young Ireland on Aug 4, 2018 21:39:08 GMT
No, I think the Amoris Laetitia controversy is still more serious, because the indissolubility of marriage comes straight from the mouth of our Lord himself. The only mention of the death penalty is a New Testament is a rather vague one, while our Lord's words on marriage could not be more explicit. And because the marriage bond is an image of Christ and his Church. I was referring more to the signifance for the magisterium of the church of the change, rather than the relative seriousness of the particular teaching in question. A change made to the Cathechism is harder to hide behind or ignore, especially if (as it more clearly appears to) it does contradict previous doctrine. A formal correction - by a successive Pope if not the college of cardinals - would seem to be more likely now. Interesting times. But couldn't the same be said about St. John Paul II? It was he who started the idea of Catholic opposition to the death penalty. Indeed, Pope Benedict XVI, who hopefully nobody here will mistake for a liberal called for its abolition. Dave Armstrong has some excellent coverage on his blog that I would highly recommend: www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2018/08/john-paul-ii-benedict-xvi-abolish-death-penalty.html
|
|
|
Post by Account Deleted on Aug 4, 2018 22:00:28 GMT
I was referring more to the signifance for the magisterium of the church of the change, rather than the relative seriousness of the particular teaching in question. A change made to the Cathechism is harder to hide behind or ignore, especially if (as it more clearly appears to) it does contradict previous doctrine. A formal correction - by a successive Pope if not the college of cardinals - would seem to be more likely now. Interesting times. But couldn't the same be said about St. John Paul II? It was he who started the idea of Catholic opposition to the death penalty. Indeed, Pope Benedict XVI, who hopefully nobody here will mistake for a liberal called for its abolition. Dave Armstrong has some excellent coverage on his blog that I would highly recommend: www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2018/08/john-paul-ii-benedict-xvi-abolish-death-penalty.htmlThe controversy isn't about the death penalty, per se. For decades the Church's social teaching and emphasis has been on moving away from tolerating the death penalty in practice in our modern conditions, but that is quite different from saying that it is now church teaching that the death penalty it is inadmissible - essentially, sinful - in all circumstances henceforth, and it is quite different again to render incorrect the Church teaching of the past. The latter is what the controversy is about - a shift in the whole basis on which Catholic Tradition operated for thousands of years. Is Catholic doctrine now mutable, depending on the conditions of the time? I have never understood it to be so - quite the opposite in fact. The Church must either absorb that somehow (which will have long-reaching consequences), or else determine this was an erroneous doctrinal move that needs to be corrected. I think it will take a while for various factions and theologians in the Vatican to absorb the ramifications of what the Pope has done here and, more importantly, what it means for the Church and what (if anything) it has to do about it. We should pray for them. More concerns about the implications of the act of changing doctrine here: www.thecatholicthing.org/2018/08/03/on-capital-punishment/"The damage that is done, and will be done, by this latest breach of “papal etiquette,” is broader and will be broader than first appears. Beyond the creation of a precedent for altering Church teaching by papal fiat, it confirms the politicization of our doctrine." And ... we don't even yet know if this is the only change to doctrine - and character of the Church - that Pope Francis intends to make before his Pontificate ends.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Aug 6, 2018 20:21:49 GMT
One problem with Pope Francis's declaration is that it does not give any biblical or patristic material in support of the change - it simply says that modern developments make it clear that this is the right way to go. (Some of the early Fathers did oppose the death penalty per se.) if changing times are all that is required for such a change, then anything can be changed.
That said, I can actually think of a parallel development. Slavery is taken for granted in the OT, there are some passages in St Paul's Epistles which can be read (ambiguously) as accepting its legitimacy, and although it has been argued that the disappearance of slavery in Europe in the early Middle Ages reflected Christian inspiration, it was certainly widely practised by Catholic countries in the early modern period and into the C19. (Brazil was the last major state to abolish slavery, in the 1880s.) Well into the C20 many theologians argued that while slavery was wrong under present circumstances, it could not be said to be intrinsically evil for the reasons given above. The teaching that slavery is intrinsically evil is a post-Vatican II development. The parallel is not exact because there is a much longer and more continuous tradition of use of the death penalty than of slavery, and of explicit magisterial approval for the death penalty - but the parallel makes me cautious in ruling out such a development. For the record,my own view is that it is a prudential judgment which would not apply under all circumstances (for example, if there were to be a massive social breakdown connected with a nuclear war or some such catastrophe, and it was necessary to deter organised brigands preying on the vulnerable) though I accept that Pope Francis wants to go beyond that position.
|
|
|
Post by Account Deleted on Aug 11, 2018 22:35:44 GMT
It appears the new wording in the Catechism doesn't change doctrine, but introduces imprecision that obfuscates it. If it is to be taken as concurring with previous doctrine, however, we can only do so by interpreting the wording in a certain way - a problem Pope John Paul's previous wording didn't have. Some days I really miss his clarity. www.catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?id=750"For those of us who believe doctrinal precision is as vital to the Catholic community as the skeleton is to the human body, the present formulation is deficient."
|
|