Amoris Laetitia is a ticking ‘atomic bomb’ set to obliterate all Catholic morality: philosopher

By Pete Balinski on LifeSiteNews

One of the world’s top Catholic philosophers has called Pope’ Francis’ Exhortation Amoris Laetitia a ticking “theological atomic bomb” that has the capacity to entirely destroy all Catholic moral teaching.

Dr. Josef Seifert, founding rector of the International Academy of Philosophy in Liechtenstein, said the only way the theological bomb can be defused is by Pope Francis retracting at least one major error in his 2016 Exhortation.

With philosophical precision, Seifert pinpoints the main problem in Amoris Laetitia (AL) to a passage that he said suggests that God actively wills people, in certain situations, to commit acts that have always been considered objectively evil by the Catholic Church.

He quotes directly from passage 303 of Amoris where Pope Francis speaks about “irregular couples” living in habitual adultery who decide to forgo following the Six Commandment.

“Yet conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel,” wrote Pope Francis in his 2016 Exhortation.

“It can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God, and come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal,” he added.

Commented Seifert: “In other words, besides calling an objective state of grave sin, euphemistically, ‘not yet fully the objective ideal,’ AL says that we can know with ‘a certain moral security’ that God himself asks us to continue to commit intrinsically wrong acts, such as adultery or active homosexuality.”

But Seifert pointed out that if just one intrinsically immoral act, such as adultery, can be permitted and even willed by God, then there is nothing stopping such a principle being applied to “all acts considered ‘intrinsically wrong.’”

If it is true that God can want an adulterous couple to live in adultery against the Sixth Commandment, he said, then there is nothing to keep the other nine Commandments from falling.

According to such logic, Seifert continued, evils such as murder, abortion, euthanasia, suicide, lying, thievery, perjury, and betrayal can be “justified in some cases and ‘be what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal.’”

“Does not pure logic demand that we draw this consequence from this proposition of Pope Francis?” the philosopher said.

Seifert said that if his above question is answered in the affirmative, then the “purely logical consequence of that one assertion of Amoris Laetitia seems to destroy the entire moral teaching of the Church.”

The professor’s concern is similar to one of the dubia (questions) raised by the four cardinals to Pope Francis last year asking him to clarify the meaning of his Exhortation.

Question two of five asks the Pope if, with the publication of Amoris, does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II in Veritatis Splendor that there are “absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts and that are binding without exceptions?”

In his paper, Seifert pleaded with Pope Francis to withdraw and condemn the notion that God sometimes wills people to commit intrinsically evil acts.

“If this is truly what AL affirms, all alarm over AL’s direct affirmations regarding matters of changes of sacramental discipline refer only to the peak of an iceberg, to the weak beginning of an avalanche, or to the first few buildings destroyed by a moral theological atomic bomb that threatens to tear down the whole moral edifice of the Ten Commandments and of Catholic moral teaching,” he said.

Leaving such a notion uncorrected will lead to “nothing less than to a total destruction of the moral teachings of the Catholic Church,” he concluded.

Last week, Cardinal Raymond Burke, one of the four cardinals who signed the dubia almost one year ago, outlined how the process for issuing a “formal correction” of the Pope would proceed if the Pope continued in his refusal to clarify his teaching.

“It seems to me that the essence of the correction is quite simple,” Burke explained.

“On the one hand, one sets forth the clear teaching of the Church; on the other hand, what is actually being taught by the Roman Pontiff is stated. If there is a contradiction, the Roman Pontiff is called to conform his own teaching in obedience to Christ and the Magisterium of the Church,” he said.

“Pope Francis has chosen not to respond to the five dubia, so it is now necessary simply to state what the Church teaches about marriage, the family, acts that are intrinsically evil, and so forth. These are the points that are not clear in the current teachings of the Roman Pontiff; therefore, this situation must be corrected. The correction would then direct itself principally to those doctrinal points,” he added.

Dr. Josef Seifert paper: Does pure Logic threaten to destroy the entire moral Doctrine of the Catholic Church?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Amoris Laetitia is a ticking ‘atomic bomb’ set to obliterate all Catholic morality: philosopher

  1. toadspittle says:

    “..a ticking ‘atomic bomb’ set to obliterate all Catholic morality: ”
    ….
    “a ticking “theological atomic bomb” that has the capacity to entirely destroy all Catholic moral teaching.”

    Except that “morality “and “moral thinking” are ery vfar from the same thing.
    Anyway, Amoris Laetitia might only “destroy” current moral teaching.
    Not all of it.

    Like

  2. Roger says:

    Shame on you Toad.
    Christ is the Way and the Truth and the Light. A singular claim proven through His Life and Resurrection.
    To deny a part of the Faith is to deny the whole of it! It was ever thus.
    Nobody comes to the Father except through Him!

    Like

  3. toadspittle says:

    “Shame on you Toad. Christ is the Way and the Truth and the Light.”
    I’ve never suggested Christ wasn’t, Roger. I just don’t know. Nobody really does.
    Certainly, lots of people are convinced that – in their particular opinion – Christ alone definitely comprises these ultimate and spectacular attributes.
    But then, a great many others (totally in far greater numbers than Christians, in fact) are convinced of all manner of alternative theories – such as, for instance, Islam is the One and Only True Faith.
    So the old Christian numbers game* no longer works.
    (i.e. *There’s more of us than anyone else in the world – so we must be the ones who are right.)

    Given this, we can surely all agree that being convinced is not necessarily knowing, or even being right. Maybe both Christianity and Islam ( or, indeed, all religions) are right.
    Or maybe both (or maybe all) religions – are wrong.
    We shall just have to wait and see, won’t we?

    [Moderator – we will indeed Toad, but remember, “blessed are those who have not seen but believe”. Might be a little too late by the time you “see” When you have hidden your talents or light under a bushel or cast your God-given pearls to the swine. If you aim to continue wallowing in meaningless relativism till the end of your days you are denying your Redeemer and mocking the Eternal Sacrifice he suffered for your sake.]

    Like

  4. toadspittle says:

    “To deny a part of the Faith is to deny the whole of it! It was ever thus.”

    You might as well say, “To deny brussels sprouts is to deny the whole of Christmas dinner,”
    Roger. But then, you might do just that, for all I know.
    …I like brussels sprouts, myself.

    Like

  5. toadspittle says:

    “With philosophical precision, Seifert pinpoints the main problem in Amoris Laetitia (AL) to a passage that he said suggests* that God actively wills people, in certain situations, to commit acts that have always been considered objectively evil by the Catholic Church.”

    First, I’d suggest that “philosophical precision,” is an oxymoron .
    Philosophy doesn’t allow for “precision,” because it can’t be measured with calipers, or whatever.
    …Then surely God doesn’t ever “Wiil” anyone to do anything? Because, if He did, that would clearly obviate Free Will – as nobody could possibly disobey His will, if He willed to impose it. Surely God simply allows – or, at very least doesn’t prevent – people from performing any action?

    *“Suggests.” Weasel word here.
    What’s “philosophically precise” about that?

    Like

  6. Roger says:

    Humani generis insistence on correspondence to Catholic doctrine.

    20. Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: “He who heareth you, heareth me”; and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians.

    Suprema haec sacra – Toad
    “.. Jesus Christ. explicitly enjoined on His apostles to teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever He Himself had commanded (Matt. 28: 19-20) ..”
    “..Not only did the Savior command that all nations should enter the Church, but He also decreed the Church to be a means of salvation without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory… ”

    “..We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those things which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or Tradition, and are proposed by the Church to be believed as divinely revealed, not only through solemn judgment but also through the ordinary and universal teaching office..”

    “..when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God. ,”

    “..Toward the end of this same encyclical letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who “are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire,” and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but on the other hand states that they are in a condition “in which they cannot be sure of their salvation” since “they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church”
    With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally well in every religion (Pope Pius IX, Allocution also Pope Pius IX in the encyclical letter, )
    ..”

    Like

  7. Toadstool: Please listen very carefully to the commentary put to you by Roger, et al. Ask God for HIS truth – and as a Catholic, it’s your duty and obligation, to sort out the wheat from the chaff. The machinations and politics of men are the play things of satan. The road map given by God, can’t be refuted. His guardian, the Holy Spirit, guarantees that, if you ask, you will be shown the truth. Time IS running out. You are seeking the truth, don’t rely upon your own confusion, put it to God. The Church will be sorted out, but not by men, but by the Will of Jesus. It’s His Church, stop fighting a battle you’ll never win! Join us in opposing any thing that is detriment to the Holy Catholic Church and the teachings of Christ. Men, i.e. Popes and prelates are fallible, Christ is not. I discovered this coming from centuries of sunni muslim’s. Reject your own vanity and humble yourself before the only truth, Jesus, and the institution he founded, and the one he guarantees! His laws are inviolate, You have courage and are stubbornly tenacious; this is to be admired. Don’t waste it, we need you on our side. Now is the time to choose.

    Like

  8. johnhenrycn says:

    An article today in Pope Francis’s favourite American pooplication: “The Muslim Jesus provides common ground for Christianity, Islam”

    Like

  9. toadspittle says:

    “I discovered this coming from centuries of sunni muslim’s.”
    You have an unsusual name for a Muslim, Nev. But I’m sure you aren’t alone.
    …And you worry too much about me.
    “God will forgive me. That’s His job.” –
    (- Heine )

    And there’s no “Roger et al.”
    Roger is unique.

    But, to be a little bit serious, you have no solid gtounds for any of your assumptions. Other than an old book. Same as the Muslims. As you know better than most, it seems.

    Like

  10. kathleen says:

    Pope Francis has recently stated that: the reform of the post V2 liturgy is “irreversible”.
    Oh, really?

    Well, well, well…. In that case perhaps he should remember that Our Lord Jesus Christ’s clear teaching on the Holy Sacrament of Marriage is also IRREVERSIBLE and part of the Sacred Deposit of Faith. And next step, to do something toute suite about rewriting Amoris Laetitia, correcting its numerous, disgraceful errors, whilst reaffirming this with a straightforward Catholic response to the dubia !!

    Ed. No one, not even the Pope, can pick and choose at random which parts of Catholic teaching are “irreversible”. This has taken the Church in her Magisterial authority, guided by the Holy Spirit, years to define. But what has been “defined” (as in the case of Catholic doctrine on Holy Matrimony) cannot ever be changed.

    Like

  11. Roger says:

    Toad your words “..But, to be a little bit serious, you have no solid grounds for any of your assumptions. Other than an old book. Same as the Muslims. As you know better than most, it seems…”

    You greater err in referencing an OLD BOOK
    The Author of SCRIPTURE and TRADITION and the ORDINARY and UNIVERSAL TEACHING OFFICE is alive
    (The Resurrection of Our Lord AND The Assumption of Our Lady means they are ALIVE)

    Suprema haec sacra – Toad I repeat
    “..We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those things which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or Tradition, and are proposed by the Church to be believed as divinely revealed, not only through solemn judgment but also through the ordinary and universal teaching office..”

    “..WE ARE BOUND BY DIVINE AND CATHOLIC FAITH TO BELIEVE ALL THOSE THINGS WHICH ARE CONTAINED IN THE WORLD OF GOD..”

    John 1 verses 1:5
    THE WORD OF GOD

    “..
    WHETHER IT BE SCRIPTURE OR TRADITION
    AND ARE PROPOSED BY THE CHURCH TO BE BELIEVED AS DIVINELY REVEALED
    NOT ONLY THROUGH SOLEMN JUDGEMENT BUT ALSO THROUGH THE ORDINARY AND UNIVERSAL TEACHING OFFICE
    ..”

    Like

  12. toadspittle says:

    Kathleen is correct as always, of course. All manner of things are “reversible,” including the post V2 liturgy – particularly that, in fact.
    We’ve reversed the teaching reagrding the orbit of the earth, whether or not heretics should be boiled in oil, the right of women to vote, the laws regarding homosexuality, and on what constiturtes legal marriage. And we’ve reversed out notions regarding Limbo, bear-baiting, how horrible Anglicans are, (except for C.S. Lewis, of course) Russia, and altar rails.
    And all this because we have Free Will.
    Nothing’s sacred nowadays. Quite right, too. Though perhaps “amended,” or ” revised,” are nearer the mark in some cases.
    Anyway – we can change any, or all, of the above back – if and when it suits us to do so.

    Like

  13. geoffkiernan says:

    A three dollar note has much in common with a certain frog? … No prizes here… Toad please give us all a break and shut up for five minutes. You really are an idiot. There was a time perhaps ( a long time ago) when you were maybe a little witty but now as you age you have simply become a pain in that portion of the human anatomy that the rest of us use to sit upon.

    Like

  14. kathleen says:

    Poor Toad!

    Thinks he knows it all. (Likes to pretend he doesn’t.)
    Asks infantile questions on Catholic matters he’s not the slightest interested in. (Never listens to the answers.)
    Scorns believers. (Admires atheists and agnostics.)
    Mocks God and spits at His Divine Law. (Hopes that God – “if He exists”, sez Toad – will overlook such [ahem] minor transgressions.)

    Poor, poor Toad!

    Like

  15. johnhenrycn says:

    “Poor Toad! Thinks he knows it all. (Likes to pretend he doesn’t.)”
    A pretty perspicacious pinpoint perlustration of his perplexing personality.

    Geoff, I take it that he’s not quite as tedious in real life. They say his castle on the El Camino is a popular pilgrimage rest area, but that may have more to do with Rebekah (sp?) and her cooking than does the prospect of a chinwag with Toad.

    Like

  16. toadspittle says:

    Why all this boring stuff about Toad?
    He’s not worth bothering with – take it from me. He knows nothing. That’s his point.
    Other people think they know what’s what. Not him. So, ignore him.
    Don’t fall for his silly questions.
    …Best stick to God.
    LiFE: We are born. We reproduce.* (well, some of us do – God help us if Roger does) We die.

    *Americans also work on cars.
    I suppose Geoff works on his bus. Bonza, cobber.

    Like

  17. toadspittle says:

    Do atomic bombs “tick,” by the way?
    I highly doubt it. But I don’t know.

    Like

  18. johnhenrycn says:

    “I highly doubt it. But I don’t know.”
    There he goes again – the know-it-all who pretends to know nothing.

    I’ve consulted an electrical engineer (online) who says “… All the nukes I’ve disarmed didn’t tick.” So put a feather in your cap, Yon Toad (oops, not you?)

    But because I didn’t know if atomic bombs tick, I typed Do atomic bombs… into Google, and the first suggested full question that popped up was “Do atomic bombs have radiation?” Don’t know who in the world would ask that – possibly someone who uses the twitter username “D. Trump”.

    Still, I shouldn’t snicker – looking back at my last comment where I spoke of the El Camino.

    Like

  19. Roger says:

    Late March 2013
    “..In the letter, Pope Francis directed the Argentinean bishops to govern the Church there following the Aparecida Document.

    The text states, in part, “[people] cannot receive Holy Communion and at the same time act with deeds or words against the commandments, particularly when abortion, euthanasia, and other grave crimes against life and family are encouraged. This responsibility weighs particularly over legislators, heads of governments, and health professionals.”
    ..”

    Like

  20. johnhenrycn says:

    Can’t say as I approve of your recent cosmetic surgery, Roger. I know that you use different names and avatars depending on whether you’re “In Town” or “In The Country”, and that’s okay. Are you now posting from Buttock Point on the Isle of Bute?

    Like

  21. toadspittle says:

    “They say (Toad’s) castle* on the Camino is a popular pilgrimage rest area, but that may have more to do with Rebekah (sp?) and her cooking ..”
    *(AKA The Peaceable Kingdom)

    The reality is, JH, that Toad provides the bulk of the cooking for the unfortunate visitors – who are mostly too hungry to care. His Toadtilla Espagnol Is a culinary legend from Roncesvalles to Santiago de Compostela, and is frequently employed in place of ballast on Basque shrimping smacks.
    Jabba will confirm this. Or else.

    Like

  22. johnhenrycn says:

    I wonder if we will live long enough to meet someday. Not likely, but our God is a wrathful god.

    Like

  23. toadspittle says:

    “… our God is a wrathful god.”
    I’m confident He will make an exception in your case, JH.

    Like

  24. JabbaPapa says:

    The reality is, JH, that Toad provides the bulk of the cooking for the unfortunate visitors – who are mostly too hungry to care. His Toadtilla Espagnol Is a culinary legend from Roncesvalles to Santiago de Compostela, and is frequently employed in place of ballast on Basque shrimping smacks.
    Jabba will confirm this. Or else.

    hmmm, actually as I recall, a restaurant was involved on my own visit, so to be perfectly honest I’ve learned something from this paragraph …

    I’d certainly have remembered eating a toadtilla, as there’s a corresponding hutt-tilla that I’d have used for comparison …

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s