Now you've gone from abject ignorance to full-blown LIES.
The excerpt I presented from the book, John Paul II for Dummies said NOTHING about this being a doctrine - only a discipline.
YOU changed it to "discipline/doctrine" - whicih is NOT what the book says.
You keep presenting texts regarding this discipline and dishonestly trying to pass them off as "doctrinal" explanations.
They're NOT - and you have failed again . . .
Now - since I presented textual evidence of this being a discipline - I now challenge YOU to present me with official text calling this a "DOCTRINE". CAN you do that??
I'm not holding my breath . . .
Did you not read the vatican document I posted?
If this is just a DISCIPLINE...
WHY, according to YOU, have bishops opposed the Amores Laetitia?
Perhaps because it is a CHANGE?
I will post the famous paragraph 8 down below, together with the much debated asterisk,,,which I have mentioned MANY TIMES.
But first....
It was important that you agree with my post no. 139 which you did NOT do because you do NOT wish to have an intelligent conversation AFTER ALL,,,but just keep repeating the same nonsense.
A TEACHING/DISCIPLINE
If you check what I had posted on post. no. 127, you'll find that a teaching of the church CAN BE CHANGED,,,as YOU have stated. But what IS a teaching or discipline?
It is a rule or law set by the church which is TOTALLY dependent on the concept brought forth by the church and has nothing or very little to do with scripture.
For instance, as stated, the forbiddance of eating meat on Friday pre Vatican II subjected person to MORTAL offense...which is in itself nonsense. Imagine telling a person that if they eat meat on Friday they will be doomed to eternal damnation (the consequence of a mortal sin)!
And this while priests of that era, ATE MEAT ON FRIDAYS because they understood what silliness it was. Now...I KNOW why this law was in place...but it was wrong in every way. It did not help to understand fasting since nice fish was had in its stead,,,,and it was not helpful in teaching self-control because there was no self-control involved.
Now we come to MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE.
AGAIN.
This is NOT a church teaching/discipline and is much more as the Vatican Document showed.
The CC is the keeper of the faith...it keeps this faith with its dogma and its doctrine.
Dogmas and Doctrine are strictly related to what JESUS TAUGHT and so this is promulgated throughout the generations.
JESUS said divorce is not lawful...
NOT THE CHURCH.
Please see Matthew 5:31-33 where Jesus plainly states that divorce is NOT ALLOWED.
In this particular verse Jesus says that divorce is allowed only in case of ADULTERY....the CC has removed even that and goes by Mark 10:11 instead where NO ALLOWANCE FOR DIVORCE IS MADE....
And, in fact, the CC DOES NOT allow for divorce in cases of adulterly...the couple is required to work it out and stay together. The adulterer is to confess and the marriage is to continue.
So...
Now we are aware of the rules of the Catholic Church....
NO DIVORCE IS ALLOWED.
A person that is divorced is allowed to receive communion if in a chase, permanent state.
NOW, let's see what this Pope Francis declared after they Synod of 2016....
First, let's see the Vatican Document regarding remarriage and communion again:
PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR LEGISLATIVE TEXTS
DECLARATION
II. CONCERNING THE ADMISSION TO HOLY COMMUNION OF FAITHFUL WHO ARE DIVORCED AND REMARRIED
The
Code of Canon Law establishes that "Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to Holy Communion" (can. 915). In recent years some authors have sustained, using a variety of arguments, that this canon would not be applicable to faithful who are divorced and remarried. It is acknowledged that paragraph 84 of
the Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris consortio, issued in 1981, had reiterated that prohibition in unequivocal terms and that it has been expressly reaffirmed many times, especially in paragraph 1650 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, published in 1992, and in the Letter written in 1994 by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Annus internationalis Familiae. That notwithstanding, the aforementioned authors offer various interpretations of the above-cited canon that exclude from its application the situation of those who are divorced and remarried.
And now...
AMORIS LAETITEA
POST-SYNODAL APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION AMORIS LÆTITIA OF THE HOLY FATHER FRANCIS TO BISHOPS, PRIESTS AND DEACONS CONSECRATED PERSONS CHRISTIAN MARRIED COUPLES AND ALL THE LAY FAITHFUL ON LOVE IN THE FAMILY
The discourse on divorce and remarriage begins on page 221 and runs for a few pages.
The asterisk at the end must be noted and is what has caused much scandal in the CC.
https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/f...sortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
Here I'll present some problems with this CHANGE which is doctrinal in nature:
Pastors will interpret this in conflicting ways. Those who are committed to traditional Catholic doctrine and practice will interpret it to mean accompanying remarried divorcees in their process of repenting for their sins, ordering their relationships according to the Gospel (at very least, ceasing to engage in non-marital intercourse), and reintegrating into the sacramental life of the Church. Others, however, will interpret it to mean assisting remarried divorcees to arrive at the judgment that since they lack sufficient responsibility, nothing hinders the possibility of fuller participation, provided they go through the formality of getting their pastors to agree with their judgment.
source: Five Serious Problems with Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia – Catholic World Report
Please note item 4 and 5 of the following:
As you well must know....absolute moral theology is a doctrine and not a discipline....**
Discipline refers to the rules of HOW communion is to be received....
NOT the canon surrounding it. As you can see "rules" is in quotation marks.
ALSO, PLEASE NOTE THAT THE INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE COUNCIL OF TRENT IS BROUGHT IN TO PLAY....it is called TEACHING,,,but you know very well that out of councils come DOCTRINE and not discipline.
4)
Its treatment of moral absolutes as “rules” articulating the demands of an “ideal” rather than binding moral duties on everyone in every situation.
5) Its inconsistency
with the teaching of Trent
1. AL’s treatment of subjective factors limiting responsibility
**Catholic moral theology has spoken about the importance of pastors being sensitive to factors limiting a penitent’s subjective guilt in order to help penitents assess their true guilt
retrospectively, i.e.,
So what do we have:
1. The idea that moral theology CANNOT change since it is biblically based and not based on church rules. THIS IS A DOCTRINE.
2. I have shown that REMARRIEDS CANNOT RECEIVE COMMUNION.
3. I have shown that NOW it is allowed.
Next, if you wish, I'll post much information on how MANY BISHOPS from around the world are NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THIS CHANGE since it is an IMPORTANT CHANGE that GOES BEYOND what you call a "teaching".
