Posted on 11/17/2016 11:34:38 AM PST by BlessedBeGod
VATICAN CITY, November 16, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- Cardinal-designate Kevin J. Farrell, one of Pope Francis’ most outspoken American supporters, has slammed a fellow U.S. bishop’s guidelines for implementing Amoris Laetitia as causing “division.”
Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput’s guidelines issued in July unequivocally state that divorced and civilly remarried Catholics may not receive Holy Communion unless they “refrain from sexual intimacy.” Chaput, who currently heads the U.S. bishops' ad hoc committee for implementing the pope’s controversial Apostolic Exhortation, has stated that the document must be interpreted “within the tradition of the Church’s teaching and life.”
But Farrell, who was recently appointed by the pope to head the new Vatican Dicastery for Laity, the Family and Life, stated that he disagreed with Chaput’s position.
“I don't share the view of what Archbishop Chaput did, no," the cardinal-designate told Catholic News Service on Tuesday. "I think there are all kinds of different circumstances and situations that we have to look at — each case as it is presented to us,” he said.
"I think that is what our Holy Father is speaking about, is when we talk about accompanying, it is not a decision that is made irrespective of the couple," he said, adding that while there is an “objective moral law" you will never find two couples who have the same reason for being divorced and remarried.
The Cardinal-designate said implementing the pope's exhortation should be done “in communion” with all U.S. bishops, not by individual bishops.
“I think that it would have been wiser to wait for the gathering of the conference of bishops where all the bishops of the United States or all the bishops of a country would sit down and discuss these things,” he said, adding that a conference-wide discussion would ensure "an approach that would not cause as much division among bishops and dioceses, and misunderstandings."
Amoris Laetitia has been a hotbed of controversy since its publication in April. It has been criticized for its ambiguity on the issues of the indissolubility of marriage and whether couples in adulterous relationships can receive Holy Communion.
In September, the Pope ended the ambiguity his document had caused when he wrote to the bishops of Argentina that there was “no other interpretation” of Amoris Laetitia other than one admitting divorced and remarried Catholics to Holy Communion. While the letter made the pope’s position clear, it caused a firestorm among faithful Catholics who questioned the pope’s statement.
Earlier this week, four Cardinals went public with their unanswered letter to Pope Francis that asked him to clarify “uncertainty, confusion, and disorientation among many of the faithful” stemming from the exhortation. One of the four cardinals, Raymond Burke, stated Tuesday that should the pope fail to address their concerns the cardinals are contemplating a “formal correction,” something quite rare within the Church.
Farrell, who once tweeted that “If you find Pope Francis ‘confusing’ – you have not read or do not understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ,” stated in the interview that Amoris Laetitia is “so important” because of its vision for family life.
"The most important part of Amoris Laetitia is not Chapter 8" on accompanying those in irregular situations, he said. "We need to explain marriage, we need to explain human love in a much better and more dynamic way.”
Farrell said that despite there being many “difficulties" that surround civilly divorced and remarried Catholics “we have to try to find ways to bring them into full communion."
Confirms what I suspected. Chaput does not have enough support within the College of Cardinals to win a showdown on this.
And the battle lines are being drawn up.
I hope I am not wrong in wishing for the Dreaded Outcome on this. The rot is too pervasive, and we need a modernist purge.
OUT OUT OUT!
What makes you say that? He has 4 Cardinals at least....more in the wings. And some folks have been wondering about Benedict in the wings in all this.
Chaput and Burke have the Pope dead to rights. The man is promoting heresy and trying to act like he’s not.
The cynic in me believes this is ultimately about winning back divorced and remarried Catholics to the collection basket.
It is up to the individual to bring themselves into full communion. It's called Free Will.
Oh. You may be right.
But of course the Church is indefectible by Divine mandate....so rack up as many bishops against us as you want, they still have that little problem to overcome. :)
At Nicaea there was literally an iota of difference between heresy and orthodoxy. Clarity is essential. Unfortunately, with Francis and his followers, including Farrell, the only clear thing coming from their mouths are their insults at those who wish to be faithful.
Pray the Church wakes.
Why does he need to “win” a “showdown”? Is collegiality chucked out the window when a conservative bishop refuses to implement a liberal Pope’s ideas?
The way I am afraid this will go down is that he’ll give an answer that is actually incorrect. Which will cause Chaput & Co. to try and force the issue. But the majority of Cardinals will end up siding with the Vatican for a host of reasons. It should not be a political play, but it is.
I guess we can just deep six all those relics and rename the churches since martyrs like Thomas Moore and those who defied the authorizes to uphold the teaching of the church died for absolutely nothing in some clerics’ minds.
In Germany, that’s absolutely the case.
What a sweet sight it will be when Cardinal Bergoglio (too old to vote in the conclave) boards a plane for Buenos Aires, never to be heard from again.
The Pope is not meeting with the Cardinals at the consistory. Unprecedented. He’s afraid of something.
Do not place any of your hopes on Chaput. He announced in August that he is incapable of seeing any difference between a pro-life candidate and a lifelong abortion fanatic.
catholicphilly.com/2016/08/think-tank/archbishop-chaput-column/some-personal-thoughts-on-the-months-ahead/
Why is everyone on this thread talking about Chaput as though he’s doing something? True, his guidelines for Philadelphia are orthodox. But it’s BURKE, not Chaput, who is moving forward.
"Full communion". This term has been around since Vatican II (although used in the broader context of the new ecclesiology). I have yet to see a pre-Vatican II teaching that uses it. All I have seen is either in communion or not in communion. Not partially or fully in communion.
Those who are divorced and remarried are not in communion just as the non-Catholic churches are not in communion with the Catholic Church. Neither are "partially" in communion with the Church of Christ.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.